In Brief
A husband was convicted of murdering his wife through burn injuries inside their home in 2003. The victim made conflicting dying declarations—one to police claiming accidental fire, and a later formal declaration to a magistrate blaming her husband. With no eyewitnesses, the Supreme Court upheld the conviction based on circumstantial evidence: the accused's history of alcohol-fueled violence, suspicious timing of witnesses being sent away, post-mortem burn patterns inconsistent with kitchen accidents, absence of cooking fuel in the kitchen, and the accused's unexplained three-month disappearance. The Court preferred the dying declaration properly recorded by the magistrate as credible and corroborative, distinguishing it from the self-serving police statement. The conviction under Section 302 IPC stands; the Court recommended the accused seek remission after serving 15 years.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.