Dying declarations need clear proof of fitness and reliable corroboration; acquittal stood where evidence remained doubtful.

Conviction based solely on dying declarations was not sustainable where the deceased had suffered extensive burn injuries, had been given a painkiller, and there was no clear assurance of a fit state of mind when the statements were recorded. The later medical endorsement of fitness did not cure that doubt, and the absence of corroboration from key neighbourhood witnesses further weakened the prosecution case. In an appeal against acquittal, the trial court's view could not be disturbed unless perverse, and its appreciation of the evidence was a possible view. The prosecution therefore failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and acquittal followed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the conviction could be sustained on the basis of dying declarations in the absence of clear assurance that the deceased was in a fit state of mind and in the absence of corroborative evidence.

Analysis: The dying declarations were proved, but the surrounding circumstances created doubt about their reliability. The deceased had suffered 98% burn injuries and had been administered a painkiller, so the possibility of trauma-induced delusion could not be ruled out. The medical endorsement of fitness was made after the statement was recorded. The prosecution version also suffered from the non-examination of important neighbourhood witnesses and from circumstances suggesting that the occurrence took place in the kitchen, which made the defence version of suicide plausible. In an appeal against acquittal, the trial court's view could not be interfered with unless it was perverse, and the trial court's appreciation of evidence was a possible view.

Conclusion: The conviction was not sustainable solely on the basis of the dying declarations, and the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The appellants were entitled to acquittal.

---