2015 (3) TMI 1431 - SC - Indian Laws

Plea of alibi - Murder - putting on ablaze by pouring kerosene - reliability of dying declaration - HELD THAT - In the cross-examination he has categorically denied the suggestion that the injuries received by the deceased could have been sustained because of kerosene oil from the stove fell on her body due to the pinning of the stove and also by fall of a tin of kerosene oil on the floor. He has deposed without any equivocation that the burn injuries sustained by the deceased were not possible due to accidental burns - There is no dispute that the value of medical evidence is only corroborative. It proves that the injuries could have been caused in the manner as alleged and nothing more. The use which the defence can make of the medical evidence is to prove that the injuries could not possibly have been caused in the manner alleged and thereby discredit the eye-witnesses. Unless, however the medical evidence in its turn goes so far that it completely rules out all possibilities whatsoever of injuries taking place in the manner alleged by eyewitnesses, the testimony of the eye-witnesses cannot be thrown out on the ground of alleged inconsistency between it and the medical evidence. Having stated about the medical evidence that has been brought on record and how such an evidence is to be valued, we think it apt to dwell upon the oral dying declaration which has been placed reliance upon by the trial Court as well as the High Court. As per the evidence of the brother, Satish, PW-1, he after reaching the place of occurrence found his sister ablaze and she had stated that her husband has poured kerosene on her and put her ablaze. There is material to show that the father, Shivcharan, PW-8, arrived after his son. The prosecution has explained about the delayed arrival of the father. In the instant case, PW-1 had immediately rushed to the house of the deceased and she had told him that her husband had poured kerosene on her. The plea taken by the Appellant that he has been falsely implicated because his money was deposited with the in-laws and they were not inclined to return, does not also really breathe the truth, for there is even no suggestion to that effect. When the trial court as well as the High Court have disbelieved the plea of alibi which is a concurrent finding of fact, there is no warrant to dislodge the same. The evidence that has been adduced by the accused to prove the plea of alibi is sketchy and in fact does not stand to reason. It is not a case where the accused has proven with absolute certainty so as to exclude the possibility of his presence at the place of occurrence. The evidence adduced by the accused is not of such a quality that the Court would entertain a reasonable doubt. The burden on the accused is rather heavy and he is required to establish the plea of alibi with certitude. In the instant case, nothing has been brought on record that it was a physical impossibility of the presence of the accused to be at the scene of the offence by reason of his presence at another place. The plea can succeed only if it is shown that the accused was so far away at the relevant time that he could not be present at the place where the crime was committed. Appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. Reliability of the oral dying declaration.
3. Testimony of key witnesses.
4. Medical evidence and its corroboration.
5. Plea of alibi by the accused.
6. Assessment of the High Court's judgment.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code:
The trial court convicted the appellant under Section 302 IPC for the murder of his wife by setting her on fire. This conviction was upheld by the High Court, which reappreciated the evidence and relied on the oral dying declaration and the testimony of the deceased's brother.

2. Reliability of the Oral Dying Declaration:
The prosecution's case heavily relied on the oral dying declaration made by the deceased to her brother, PW-1, stating that her husband poured kerosene on her and set her on fire. The Supreme Court emphasized the importance of scrutinizing dying declarations with caution, ensuring they are voluntary, truthful, and made in a conscious state of mind. The court referred to precedents like *Laxman v. State of Maharashtra* and *Babulal v. State of M.P.*, which highlight the solemnity and sanctity of dying declarations.

3. Testimony of Key Witnesses:
The key witnesses included:
- PW-1 (Brother of the deceased): He testified that his sister named her husband as the assailant.
- PW-3 (Daughter of the deceased): Initially supported the prosecution but later turned hostile.
- PW-8 (Father of the deceased): Corroborated the brother's testimony.
- Other witnesses like PW-2 and PW-4 were declared hostile.

The court noted that despite PW-3 turning hostile, her initial statement and the consistent testimonies of PW-1 and PW-8 were credible.

4. Medical Evidence and Its Corroboration:
Dr. G.K. Choubey, who conducted the post-mortem, confirmed that the deceased suffered 100% antemortem burns, which were not accidental. The presence of kerosene on the scalp and soot particles in the larynx supported the prosecution's case. The court reiterated that medical evidence is corroborative and should align with the eyewitness accounts unless it completely rules out the possibility of the injuries occurring as described by the witnesses.

5. Plea of Alibi by the Accused:
The accused claimed he was at his sister's place during the incident (Bhaiya Dooj). The court emphasized that the burden of proving an alibi lies on the accused, requiring strict proof. The testimony of the father (PW-8) and the circumstances of the incident disproved the alibi. The court referred to *Binay Kumar Singh v. State of Bihar* and other cases to illustrate the stringent requirements for establishing an alibi.

6. Assessment of the High Court's Judgment:
The Supreme Court found no fault in the High Court's judgment, which upheld the trial court's findings. The High Court correctly relied on the oral dying declaration, medical evidence, and the testimonies of key witnesses. The plea of alibi was rightly rejected due to insufficient evidence.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the conviction and life sentence under Section 302 IPC. The judgment highlighted the credibility of the oral dying declaration, the corroborative medical evidence, and the failure of the accused to establish a credible alibi.