Husband's murder conviction upheld based on wife's dying declaration about kerosene attack, alibi defense rejected

The SC dismissed the appeal in a murder case where the accused allegedly poured kerosene on the deceased and set her ablaze. The court relied on the dying declaration made by the victim to her brother, stating her husband had poured kerosene on her. The court found the medical evidence corroborative and noted it did not rule out the manner of injury alleged by witnesses. The accused's alibi plea was rejected as sketchy and lacking certainty, failing to establish physical impossibility of presence at the crime scene. Both trial court and HC had concurrently rejected the alibi defense.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. Reliability of the oral dying declaration.
3. Testimony of key witnesses.
4. Medical evidence and its corroboration.
5. Plea of alibi by the accused.
6. Assessment of the High Court's judgment.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code:
The trial court convicted the appellant under Section 302 IPC for the murder of his wife by setting her on fire. This conviction was upheld by the High Court, which reappreciated the evidence and relied on the oral dying declaration and the testimony of the deceased's brother.

2. Reliability of the Oral Dying Declaration:
The prosecution's case heavily relied on the oral dying declaration made by the deceased to her brother, PW-1, stating that her husband poured kerosene on her and set her on fire. The Supreme Court emphasized the importance of scrutinizing dying declarations with caution, ensuring they are voluntary, truthful, and made in a conscious state of mind. The court referred to precedents like *Laxman v. State of Maharashtra* and *Babulal v. State of M.P.*, which highlight the solemnity and sanctity of dying declarations.

3. Testimony of Key Witnesses:
The key witnesses included:
- PW-1 (Brother of the deceased): He testified that his sister named her husband as the assailant.
- PW-3 (Daughter of the deceased): Initially supported the prosecution but later turned hostile.
- PW-8 (Father of the deceased): Corroborated the brother's testimony.
- Other witnesses like PW-2 and PW-4 were declared hostile.

The court noted that despite PW-3 turning hostile, her initial statement and the consistent testimonies of PW-1 and PW-8 were credible.

4. Medical Evidence and Its Corroboration:
Dr. G.K. Choubey, who conducted the post-mortem, confirmed that the deceased suffered 100% antemortem burns, which were not accidental. The presence of kerosene on the scalp and soot particles in the larynx supported the prosecution's case. The court reiterated that medical evidence is corroborative and should align with the eyewitness accounts unless it completely rules out the possibility of the injuries occurring as described by the witnesses.

5. Plea of Alibi by the Accused:
The accused claimed he was at his sister's place during the incident (Bhaiya Dooj). The court emphasized that the burden of proving an alibi lies on the accused, requiring strict proof. The testimony of the father (PW-8) and the circumstances of the incident disproved the alibi. The court referred to *Binay Kumar Singh v. State of Bihar* and other cases to illustrate the stringent requirements for establishing an alibi.

6. Assessment of the High Court's Judgment:
The Supreme Court found no fault in the High Court's judgment, which upheld the trial court's findings. The High Court correctly relied on the oral dying declaration, medical evidence, and the testimonies of key witnesses. The plea of alibi was rightly rejected due to insufficient evidence.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the conviction and life sentence under Section 302 IPC. The judgment highlighted the credibility of the oral dying declaration, the corroborative medical evidence, and the failure of the accused to establish a credible alibi.

---