In a murder case, the dying declaration made to a judicial magistrate too cannot be relied upon to convict the accused if the court suspects the possibility of the victim having been tutored by others, the Madras High Court Bench here has said.
A Division Bench of Justices S. Nagamuthu and V.S. Ravi made the observation while reversing the conviction and life imprisonment imposed on a person for having allegedly dousing his wife with kerosene and burning her to death following a domestic dispute on June 30, 2013.
Allowing an appeal filed by him challenging the conviction and punishment imposed by Pudukottai Mahila Court on December 22, 2014, the judges pointed out that the victim had claimed to have committed suicide when she was taken to a Government Hospital immediately after the incident.
Subsequently, she was shifted to a private hospital in Madurai where she informed a woman doctor to have sustained the burns during an accidental fire. Thereafter, the police seemed to have inquired her at the hospital and booked her husband on charges of attempting to murder her.
Further, when a Judicial Magistrate visited the hospital for recording the dying declaration, he seemed to have noticed the presence of some of the prosecution witnesses in the room and asked them to leave the place before he could record her version of the incident.
Though the woman had indicted her husband in the dying declaration made to the magistrate, such a declaration could not be believed since there was a strong possibility of her having been tutored by others, the Division Bench said and desisted from confirming the conviction.
It agreed with appellant’s counsel M. Karunanithi that the appellant’s 11-year-old daughter, who was admittedly present in the house at the time of the incident, had not supported the prosecution’s case.
The girl had categorically stated that her mother committed suicide and did not even clarify whether her father was present in the house at the time of occurrence.
