In Brief
The appellant was convicted of murdering his wife by pouring kerosene on her and setting her on fire after a drunken quarrel. He contested the conviction arguing the dying declaration was unreliable because his wife suffered 92% burn injuries and thus could not have given a coherent statement. The Supreme Court upheld the conviction, holding that persons with extensive burns can make valid dying declarations if medically certified as conscious and fit. The Court found the dying declaration clearly implicated the appellant, rejected the defence claim of accidental lamp-fall, and found the burn injuries to the appellant and children reconcilable with homicide. The appeal was dismissed and the bail bond cancelled.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.