In Brief
The appellant was convicted of murdering his wife by setting her ablaze with kerosene in 1991. His conviction rested on three dying declarations made by the deceased to independent witnesses: a landlord's daughter, a police officer, and an Executive Magistrate. The High Court had rejected two declarations because the recorders did not reiterate exact words during deposition. The Supreme Court held that dying declarations need not be repeated verbatim by the recorder and that the recorder need not recite exact words spoken. The Court upheld the conviction, finding that all three declarations, consistently accusing the appellant and recorded with procedural safeguards, sufficiently established guilt for murder.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.