Can’t Presume That Dying Person Won’t Make False Statement: Gujarat High Court Confirms Acquittal In Case Where Woman Was Allegedly Burnt Alive
The appeal before the Gujarat High Court was filed against the acquittal of the accused for the commission of the offences under Sections 302, 294, 452 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
While upholding the order of acquittal of in-laws in a case where a woman was allegedly burnt alive, the Gujarat High Court has observed that it can't be presumed in all cases that a dying person would not make a false statement.
The appeal before the High Court was filed under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, against the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge whereby the accused were acquitted for commission of the offences under Sections 302, 294, 452 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
The Division Bench of Justice Vaibhavi D. Nanavati and Justice Utkarsh Thakorbhai Desai said, “It is a settled law that, when dying declaration is doubtful of being voluntary and truthful, conviction cannot be based on same without corroboration, and that the court cannot in all cases presume, that dying person would not make a false statement.”
Additional Public Prosecutor Jirga Jhaveri represented the Appellant.
Factual Background
The incident dates back to the year 1998, when the deceased’s husband had gone for labor work in the morning. The deceased had not gone to work. While she was plastering her house with cow dung, her elder sister-in-laws (accused 2 & 3) as well as the husband of one of the sister-in-laws (accused 1) who also lived nearby, came to her house and started abusing her.
It was the case of the prosecution that the accused persons poured kerosene on the deceased, lit a matchstick stick and set her on fire. Hearing the scream, the deceased’s mother-in-law rushed to her and covered her with a blanket. The woman succumbed to the burn injuries in the hospital. Upon committal of the case, the Trial Court framed charges. The respondents-accused came to be acquitted. It was in such circumstances that the appeal came to be filed before the High Court. The appeal stood abated qua the second accused due to her death.
Reasoning
On a perusal of the facts and the earlier orders, the Bench noted that the competent court had not ruled out the possibility of a previous animosity between the deceased and the accused, and the inference that, therefore, the deceased could have named the accused perpetrators of the alleged crime. There were no eyewitnesses to the incident in question to corroborate the dying declaration.
It was further noted that the competent court had held that, in the absence of any cogent evidence on record pinning the guilt on the accused beyond a reasonable doubt, they cannot be held guilty for the offences so charged against them. The APP also did not show any reliable and cogent evidence to take a contrary view in the matter, or that the approach of the Court below was vitiated by some manifest illegality or that the decision was perverse, or that the Court below had ignored the material evidence on record.
Referring to the judgment in State of Karnataka Vs. Hemareddy (1981), the Bench said, “It is also a settled legal position that in acquittal appeals, the appellate court is not required to rewrite the judgement or to give fresh reasonings, when the reasons assigned by the Court below are found to be just and proper.”
“Thus, in case the appellate court agrees with the reasons and the opinion given by the competent court below, then the discussion of evidence at length is not necessary”, it added.
Thus, finding no merit in the appeal, the Bench dismissed the same.
Cause Title: State of Gujarat v. Kalidas Alias Narayaan Shanabhai Fulmali & Ors (Neutral Citation: 2025:GUJHC:32563-DB)
Appearance
Appellant: Additional Public Prosecutor Jirga Jhaveri