Credible child-witness testimony can sustain a murder conviction despite an unreliable dying declaration.

Sila Devi died from extensive burn injuries sustained at her matrimonial home.

The prosecution alleged that her husband, Govind Yadav, poured kerosene on her and set her alight.

Their seven-year-old son, examined as P.W. 3, testified that he witnessed the appellant set his mother on fire.

The prosecution also relied on a purported fardbeyan recorded in hospital, but the High Court found it doubtful because it was not medically certified and was produced with the charge sheet only later.

The trial court convicted the appellant under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to life imprisonment and a fine; he appealed.

1. Whether the trial court’s judgment of conviction and sentence suffered from a serious error of law warranting appellate interference

The conviction was for murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

The Court assessed the child witness’s testimony for competence and reliability, noting that a child witness may be relied upon where the witness understands and answers questions intelligently and the testimony withstands scrutiny.

The Court also assessed the alleged dying declaration for reliability and declined to rely on it where its authenticity and the deceased’s fitness to make the statement were doubtful.

The Court found that the child witness gave a clear account of the appellant setting his mother on fire, and that his presence and ability to understand the questions were not undermined in cross-examination.

It considered the alleged dying declaration unreliable because it lacked medical certification and had been attached to the charge sheet later, but held that the conviction did not depend on that statement: the child’s testimony and the surrounding evidence were sufficient to establish the appellant’s culpability.

The Court rejected the challenges based on the witness’s relationship to the deceased and delay in lodging the FIR, finding the delay explained.

It upheld the appellant’s conviction under Section 302 IPC and life sentence, dismissed the appeal, and directed that any pending interlocutory application stand disposed of.