Consistent dying declaration corroborated by medical evidence sustains concurrent conviction for murder.

The appellant married the deceased, Sugna Bai, approximately one month prior to the incident on 15.10.2012

On that date, the appellant, in an intoxicated state, physically assaulted the deceased, poured kerosene on her, and set her on fire after locking her in a rented room

The deceased was hospitalized with extensive burns and gave a statement to the police (FIR) and a subsequent dying declaration to a Magistrate

She succumbed to her injuries on 19.10.2012

The Trial Court (Bundi) convicted the appellant under Sections 302 and 342 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), sentencing him to life imprisonment

This conviction was upheld by the Rajasthan High Court on 20.08.2019

1. Whether the death of the deceased was homicidal and caused by injuries resulting from an igneous substance

2. Whether the dying declaration (Exhibit P-20) was recorded when the deceased was in a fit mental state and could serve as the sole basis for conviction

3. Whether the concurrent findings of conviction warranted interference despite eyewitnesses turning hostile

The Court applied Section 302 (Murder) and Section 342 (Wrongful confinement) of the IPC

It further relied on Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (now Section 26 of the Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023), which governs dying declarations as an exception to the hearsay rule

The Court cited Manjunath v. State of Karnataka, which established that a consistent, believable dying declaration free of tutoring is sufficient for conviction

The Court also applied the principle that concurrent findings of fact are not lightly interfered with unless there is a manifest error of law or misdirection in evidence

The Court focused on the validity of the dying declaration (Ex. P-20).

It noted that the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (PW-12) followed the proper procedure by obtaining a fitness certificate from the duty doctor (PW-15) prior to recording the statement in a question-and-answer format

The Court rejected the appellant's contention that the deceased was not in a sound mind, noting the Magistrate’s testimony that she was conscious and that family members were excluded during recording to prevent tutoring

Although two eyewitnesses (PW-2 and PW-3) turned hostile, the Court held this insignificant because the dying declaration was strongly corroborated by medical evidence (PW-9 and PW-10), which confirmed the cause of death as septicaemia due to burning

The Court also dismissed the challenge to the medical jurist's (PW-10) testimony, finding no evidence of lack of qualification

The Court held that the dying declaration was reliable, voluntary, and properly recorded, thereby overcoming the hostility of other witnesses

In a postscript, the Court lamented the persistence of patriarchal violence and the "paradox" of continuing crimes against women despite extensive legislative and social reforms

All pending applications were disposed of