In Brief
In this murder case, the appellants were convicted on the basis of two dying declarations: an FIR lodged by the victim and a statement recorded under Section 161 CrPC. The Supreme Court acquitted them, finding critical flaws in the prosecution evidence. The statement recorded from a severely injured victim in critical condition (with unrecordable blood pressure) without medical clearance lacked reliability. The FIR showed unexplained delays and unverified signatures. Critically, identity of the accused rested on vague descriptions ('Hari the Tempowala', 'son of Nathu') without proper identification evidence. All material witnesses turned hostile, and a key eyewitness (the son) was not examined. The Court held that reasonable doubt existed as to both identity and guilt, requiring acquittal."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.