The Patna High Court noted that a victim or deceased who sustained 100 percent burn injuries and caught fire would have been unable to provide any statements that could implicate the accused, raising concerns about the reliability of the claim made in the dying declaration.

The division bench comprising Justice Ashutosh Kumar and Justice Jitendra Kumar was deliberating on a criminal appeal challenging the conviction under Sections 498A and 302 of the IPC.

The appellants in question are the husband and father-in-law of the deceased, who passed away from burn injuries. The dying declaration of the deceased was recorded by Sub-Inspector (PW-6) in the presence of the deceased's brother (PW-1) and a doctor (PW-4) at the hospital.

During the trial, the deceased's brother stated that he received a call from his uncle informing him that his sister had been burned by her husband and in-laws. He promptly went to the police station and reported the incident, after which the police accompanied him to the deceased's matrimonial home. There, he witnessed that his sister had suffered severe burns. At the hospital, the sub-inspector recorded the dying declaration, stating that the victim's husband and in-laws had set her on fire because she had not brought Rs. 2 lakhs in dowry from her home.

The appellants contended that the deceased's death was accidental. They argued that due to her complete burn injuries, she would not have been able to make the statements attributed to her by the prosecution.

“With such burn injuries to the extent of 100%, as claimed by the defence, she would not have been in a position to make a detailed statement implicating the appellants…and which statement has been relied upon by the Trial Court as the dying declaration of the deceased.”

The Court also noted that during the cross-examination of the doctor, it was revealed that the burn injuries were not 100%, although this detail was not specified in the post-mortem report.

The Court expressed reservations about the deceased's brother immediately going to the police station upon learning of his sister's burn incident, instead of first visiting her matrimonial home. It noted that the evidence was inconsistent regarding whether PW-1 had initially gone to the deceased's matrimonial home and whether the deceased, while still alive, was capable of speaking and providing her statement.

“It appears to be rather strange that on the asking of the brother of the victim and without recording any detailed statement, the police proceeded to the matrimonial home of the deceased.”

During the trial, the sub-inspector testified that the victim's injuries were not 100% and that she was conscious at her matrimonial home. In response, the Court remarked that "If the victim was conscious, it would have been ideal to record her statement there before transporting her to the hospital. There was some delay in arranging transportation, which elapsed valuable time."

The Court concluded that the prosecution's case raised doubts about the authenticity of the dying declaration (fardbeyan) and failed to establish the guilt of the appellants beyond a reasonable doubt.

“The deceased having suffered 100 percent burn injuries and the unnecessary insistence of PW-4 and PW-6 about the fit mental and physical health of the victim/ deceased to make such statement, renders the prosecution case doubtful or at-least the implication of the appellants to be not beyond shadow of doubts.”

It thus reversed the judgment of the Trial Court and acquitted the appellants under Section 498A and 302 IPC.

Case title: Mahesh Pandit & Anr. vs. The State of Bihar, CR. APP (DB) No.1242 of 2016