- - The Rajasthan High Court overturned a 35-year-old conviction, acquitting one of three individuals originally found guilty of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment in 1989.
- Justices Pushpendra Singh Bhati and Munnuri Laxman emphasized the importance of relying on the most credible dying declaration when faced with multiple contradictory statements.
- The Court noted that when multiple dying declarations contain inconsistencies, the statement recorded by a Magistrate or a higher officer can be relied upon if it is truthful and free of suspicion.
- The appellant, convicted in a 1989 murder case, argued that the deceased initially gave a dying declaration to an assistant sub-inspector naming the three accused, including the appellant.
- An FIR was registered based on this declaration, but a subsequent dying declaration recorded by a Magistrate named different individuals who were not prosecuted.
- The trial court ignored the second dying declaration and convicted the appellant and two others based on the police statement.
- The appellant's counsel argued that the contradictions between the two dying declarations made them untrustworthy and that the trial court's judgment was not justified since the second declaration was neither investigated nor prosecuted.
- The Court agreed, noting that the conflicting dying declarations cast doubt on the prosecution's case.
- The Court stated that the trial court's reliance on the police-recorded declaration was not justified, especially as the law requires considering the Magistrate-recorded declaration in such cases.
- The Court held that additional corroborative evidence is required in cases with contradictory declarations.
- In this case, there was no strong evidence to support the prosecution's claim that the police-recorded declaration was more reliable than the one recorded by the Magistrate.
- Accordingly, the conviction order was set aside, and the appellant was acquitted.
No comments:
Post a Comment