The Rajasthan High Court has dismissed a criminal appeal challenging an acquittal order issued 35 years ago in a murder case allegedly linked to unmet dowry demands.

The court observed that the critical dying declaration was made 16 days after the initial one, and the subsequent report was filed after an undue delay of 16 days following the incident.

The division bench, comprising Justice Pushpendra Singh Bhati and Justice Munnuri Laxman, was examining a criminal appeal challenging a 1989 order from the sessions judge. In that order, the accused were acquitted of charges related to murder and cruelty against the deceased.

The case involved two dying declarations. In the first, the deceased claimed that she accidentally caught fire while cooking, resulting in her burns. In the second declaration, she alleged that the burns were inflicted by the accused in retaliation for her refusal to meet their dowry demands.

The appellants' counsel contended that the trial court erred in placing greater emphasis on the first dying declaration. They argued that this statement was given under duress, following threats from the accused to kill the deceased's children and her brother.

On the other hand, the counsel for the accused argued that if the injuries had indeed been inflicted by the accused, the deceased's relatives should have filed a report immediately upon receiving the information or at least after reaching the hospital. However, the report was only lodged after a 16-day delay.

The counsel suggested that the passage of time and the deteriorating condition of the deceased led to the creation of a new narrative by the victim and her family to implicate the accused.

The Court considered both dying declarations: the first, made immediately after the burning incident in front of the police, and the second, made 16 days later. The latter declaration was the basis for the report lodged by the deceased's relatives against the accused.

The Court observed that no explanation was provided for the 16-day delay in lodging the report against the accused, which was based on the second dying declaration. The Court also noted the potential for influence or tutoring of the deceased by her relatives during this period.

“If really there was a role of the respondents-accused in commission of the offence, the parents of the deceased after knowing the incident from the deceased, definitely would have lodged a report immediately and they would not have waited till 19.09.1986. The relatives of the deceased were with them for all that 16 days and there is scope of influence and tutoring the deceased.”

The Court further noted that, regarding the argument that the first declaration was given under threat, there was no clarity on when the threat was made. Additionally, even if such a threat existed, the deceased could have informed her relatives as soon as they arrived. The 16-day gap between the two dying declarations raised doubts about the credibility of the second declaration.

Accordingly, the Court did not deem it correct to interfere with the decision of acquittal passed by the trial court and the criminal appeal was dismissed.

Case Title: State of Rajasthan v Narsi Ram & Anr.