In Brief
A husband and sister-in-law were convicted by the High Court of murdering a woman by dousing her with kerosene and setting her on fire, based primarily on the victim's dying declarations. The Supreme Court reversed the conviction, holding that while dying declarations are important evidence, they cannot be the sole basis for conviction when serious doubts exist about the victim's mental fitness. The victim had 98% burn injuries, was in severe trauma, and had been administered painkillers before the declaration was recorded. The Court found the trial court's acquittal reasonable, as the defence narrative—that the sensitive victim committed suicide when pressured to move to the village—could not be wholly dismissed, and key corroborative witnesses (neighbours, companions) were not examined. The appeal was allowed and the appellants released."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.