In Brief
A woman died from severe burns after her in-laws demanded money from her. She made two statements about how she was burned: one to police, another to a Magistrate. The trial court convicted the in-laws for murder based on the Magistrate's statement. The High Court acquitted them, doubting both statements because they conflicted. The Supreme Court reinstated the conviction, holding that the Magistrate's recorded statement was reliable as it came from a neutral officer, the deceased was conscious when making it, and medical evidence (burns everywhere except the chest) proved someone else burned her, not suicide. A dying declaration by a Magistrate requires no corroboration and can support conviction alone.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.