Back
Upholds Life Term For Woman Who Burned Pregnant Daughter-In-Law
In a significant ruling on the of dying declarations, the has affirmed the life imprisonment of a woman convicted for the murder of her pregnant daughter-in-law. A Division Bench comprising Justice T. Amarnath Goud and Justice S. Datta Purkayastha held that both the written and oral dying declarations made by the victim were reliable and sufficient to sustain the conviction, even without .
A Tragic Fire in a Matrimonial Home
The case traces back to when Iti Saha married Dhananjoy Barman , son of the appellant Parul Barman . The marriage soon soured, with the prosecution alleging that the victim was subjected to constant harassment and monetary demands by her in-laws. The situation reached a horrifying climax on , when Iti, who was nine months pregnant and due to deliver in four days, suffered catastrophic burn injuries at her matrimonial home in Durganagar, Bishalgarh.
According to the prosecution, Parul Barman tied a cloth (gamcha) around Iti’s mouth, poured kerosene over her, and set her ablaze. The victim succumbed to 97% total body surface area burns the same day. The police registered an FIR and after investigation charged Parul Barman under Sections 498A and 302 of the . The trial court convicted her under Section 302 IPC, sentencing her to rigorous imprisonment for life and a fine of ₹50,000.
Challenge to the Conviction: Arguments of the Appellant
The appellant’s counsel, , advanced several grounds to challenge the conviction. She argued that independent witnesses from the locality, who rushed to the scene after hearing cries, did not see the appellant at the spot where the victim was burning. These witnesses also testified to a cordial relationship between the victim and her in-laws, undermining the prosecution’s case of torture.
A key submission was that the victim had accidentally caught fire while cooking. The defense pointed to evidence that some neighbors believed the victim had poured kerosene on a stove to increase the flame. Moreover, it was contended that the recorded by the Executive Magistrate suffered from procedural irregularities and should not be relied upon without . The appellant also highlighted the absence of independent witnesses and lapses in the investigation, including the FIR not mentioning the date of the incident.
State’s Stand: Dying Declarations as the Bedrock
, the learned Public Prosecutor, countered by emphasizing the consistency and credibility of the dying declarations. The recorded by PW-7 Smti. Emilia Reang , an Executive Magistrate, was supported by oral declarations made by the victim to several relatives, including her father (PW-3), brother, and other family members. All these witnesses deposed that the victim explicitly stated her mother-in-law had tied her mouth and set her on fire.
The prosecution also highlighted crucial forensic evidence: the post-mortem report noted a distinct band of unburnt skin on the lower face and neck, exactly where the cloth had been tied. Additionally, the investigating officer confirmed that no kerosene stove was found at the scene—only a gas stove—destroying the defense theory of a cooking accident. The State argued that in matrimonial offenses, relatives are often the only witnesses, and their testimony cannot be discarded merely on grounds of interest.
Court’s Analysis: Solely Sufficient
The High Court undertook a thorough reappreciation of the evidence, focusing on the legal principles governing dying declarations. The Bench referred to a catena of judgments, including , , and , to reiterate that a can be the sole basis of conviction if it inspires confidence, is voluntary, and is made when the declarant is in a fit state of mind.
The court noted that the doctor had certified the victim fit to make a statement before the Executive Magistrate recorded the declaration. The thumb impression of the victim and the signature of the recording officer were exhibited without objection. Furthermore, the oral dying declarations made to multiple relatives were consistent with the written one. The Bench observed:
“There is no hesitation in the mind of this Court in relying upon the oral as well as made by the victim and to warrant conviction against the accused of this case on the basis of the said evidence… that on the also conviction can be warranted against the accused, if it is found reliable.”
The court also dismissed the argument that relative witnesses are inherently unreliable, stating that in cases of bride burning occurring within the four walls of the matrimonial home, it is the relatives of the victim who often hear the dying declarations. The absence of independent witnesses does not weaken the prosecution’s case.
Key Observations from the Judgment
The Bench made several pivotal observations while upholding the conviction:
- On the victim’s state of mind: “It is admitted that the victim was in fit state of mind when the same [] was recorded by PW-7.”
- On the defense of accident: The court noted that the hand sketch map of the place of occurrence showed a gas stove, not a kerosene stove, thereby negating the theory of accidental fire during cooking.
- On the : “As it is not disputed that the accused was in the house when the fire incident took place, she has about the cause and effect of the incident in view of so, it is the burden of the accused to explain the situation of fire incident under .”
- On the gravity of the crime: The court underscored that the victim was pregnant and her delivery was due in four days, meaning “virtually two lives have been assassinated by the accused of this case.”
Decision and Implications
After analyzing the evidence and legal principles, the High Court concluded that the crime against the appellant was proved . The judgment of the trial court was found to be just and proper, requiring no interference. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed , and the life imprisonment sentence along with the fine was upheld.
This ruling reinforces the legal position that a , if credible and voluntary, can form the sole foundation for a conviction in murder cases. It also sends a strong message that offenses of bride burning, even when occurring within the secrecy of the home, will not escape justice when the victim’s last words point to the perpetrator. The decision serves as a crucial precedent for courts dealing with similar cases where direct evidence is scarce but dying declarations are available.
