Doubts Over Dying Declaration and FIR Delay Lead to Acquittal in Murder Case Under S.302 IPC: Karnataka High Court - 2025-10-01

Karnataka High Court Acquits Husband in Wife's Burning Death Case, Citing 'Reasonable Doubt' Over Dying Declarations and FIR Delay

Dharwad, Karnataka - The Karnataka High Court has acquitted a man convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder of his wife, citing significant inconsistencies in the prosecution's evidence, particularly surrounding the victim's dying declarations. A division bench of Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum and Justice G Basavaraja set aside the 2022 judgment of the Ballari Sessions Court, ruling that the prosecution failed to prove the accused's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

The court highlighted glaring contradictions, the turning of key witnesses hostile, and an unexplained delay in filing the First Information Report (FIR) as fatal to the prosecution's case.

Background of the Case

The appellant, Umesh N., was convicted under Sections 498A (cruelty by husband) and 302 (murder) of the Indian Penal Code for the death of his wife, Lakshmi. The prosecution's case was that on February 15, 2017, Umesh demanded money for alcohol, and upon his wife's refusal, he kicked her, poured kerosene, and set her on fire. Lakshmi succumbed to her burn injuries on February 21, 2017. The trial court had relied heavily on two dying declarations allegedly made by the victim to convict Umesh.

Appellant's Arguments on Appeal

The defense, led by Advocate Sri Srinand A. Pachhapure, mounted a strong challenge to the conviction, arguing that:

* Hostile Witnesses: Nearly all material witnesses, including the deceased's own parents (PW5 and PW7) and alleged eyewitnesses, did not support the prosecution's narrative.

* Contradictory Dying Declarations: Major discrepancies existed between the initial police complaint (treated as a dying declaration, Ex. P28) and a subsequent declaration recorded by a Tahsildar (Ex. P29). Notably, the police complaint bore a thumb impression, while the Tahsildar later recorded that the victim's hands were too burnt to provide one.

* Victim's Fitness: With over 90% third-degree burns, the victim's physical and mental fitness to give a coherent statement was questionable.

* Language Barrier: The deceased's parents testified that their daughter, who was from Andhra Pradesh, did not know Kannada, the language in which both declarations were recorded.

* Unexplained FIR Delay: The FIR, registered on February 15, 2017, reached the magistrate's court only on the afternoon of February 16, an inordinate delay that the prosecution failed to explain, raising suspicions of it being "ante-timed."

* Accused's Conduct: The accused himself sustained burn injuries while trying to save his wife and rushed her to the hospital, a conduct inconsistent with that of a murderer.

High Court's Scrutiny and Ruling

The High Court meticulously analyzed the evidence and found the prosecution's case riddled with inconsistencies. The judgment, authored by Justice G Basavaraja, pointed out several critical flaws.

Pivotal Judgment Excerpts:

"Though the victim was not in a position to put her LTM or signature on dying declaration recorded by the Tahsildar, how she has put her LTM on Exhibit P28 has not been explained by the prosecution... This conduct of the Investigating Officer will create reasonable doubt as to the recording of complaint-Exhibit P28 as well as dying declaration-Exhibit P29."

The court observed that the parents' testimony about their daughter not knowing Kannada and being unable to speak in the hospital cast a "serious doubt" on the authenticity of the dying declarations.

On the procedural lapses, the court noted:

"The prosecution has not explained anything as to delay in submitting the FIR to the Court. This evidence clearly establishes that ante-date and ante-time is mentioned in First Information Report."

The bench also gave weight to the accused's conduct post-incident. The fact that he sustained burn injuries while trying to douse the flames and immediately sought medical help for his wife was seen as a factor creating reasonable doubt about his culpability. The prosecution's failure to explain the accused's injuries was deemed a significant omission.

Final Verdict and Implications

Concluding that the cumulative effect of the hostile witnesses, contradictory evidence, and procedural violations created a "reasonable doubt" in the prosecution's case, the High Court allowed the appeal.

The final order stated:

* The appeal is allowed.

* The judgment of conviction and order on sentence passed by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ballari is set aside.

* The accused is acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 498A and 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

The court also directed the District Legal Services Authority, Ballari, to award suitable compensation to the minor children of the deceased under the victim compensation scheme.