High Court acquits three in-laws on benefit of doubt in wife’s ‘murder’
Kolkata: Observing that when a dying declaration is the sole basis of conviction it must not suffer from infirmities, Calcutta High Court, extending the benefit of doubt, set aside life sentences and acquitted three in-law members accused of burning the wife to death.
The bench of Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Gaurang Kanth was moved by the convicts (the mother-in-law, brother-in-law and brother-in-law’s wife). The husband and other in-laws were acquitted. The prosecution’s case was based on the written dying declaration of the victim (wife) who allegedly told the Block Development Officer (BDO) that her husband and in-laws poured kerosene and set her on fire. The father of the victim had lodged a police complaint against the husband and other in-laws.
The defence argued that the written dying declaration was recorded by BDO in English. There is no proof he explained it to the victim. The doctor did not certify or state in court whether the victim was conscious or in a fit state to make the statement.
His signature on the declaration is absent. Victim’s signature is also absent. Further, the written declaration is contrary to the victim’s oral declaration to her parents and relatives that she suffered accidental burns while cooking. Her wearing apparels wasn’t produced in court but a burnt quilt produced proved in-laws tried to save her. Victim’s father also changed statements and didn’t support the written declaration.
Prosecution argued that BDO and the doctor had no motive for lying. The BDO said the doctor told him the victim was in a fit state for giving a statement. Since her hands were burnt her signature could not be obtained. In the FIR, the father alleged that the husband and in-laws set his daughter on fire. Official declaration must gain priority over the oral declaration.
Court noted the autopsy report stated 95 per cent of her body was burnt. Death was due to shock. No smell of kerosene oil was detected from the body. No certificate was given by the doctor to vouch for her ‘fit state’. Medical officer’s signature was also missing on the dying declaration.
Observing that when a dying declaration is the sole basis of conviction it must not suffer from infirmities else it casts a doubt, the court acquitted the three accused in-laws upon execution of a bond to the satisfaction of the trial court.
