New Delhi, March 17 The Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld the conviction of a man for killing his wife by setting her on fire in 2000, saying there was no reason to disbelieve the victim's dying declaration.
The top court termed the testimony of the couple's eldest daughter, an eyewitness, as crucial and said her evidence proved that her father had brought kerosene, poured it on her mother, and lit the fire.
"There is no material on record to show why she would falsely depose against her father," a bench of Justices Pankaj Mithal and SVN Bhatti said.
The bench dismissed the appeal filed by the man who had challenged a September 2010 order of the Karnataka High Court which had convicted and sentenced him to life imprisonment in the case.
The high court had overturned the judgment of the trial court, which had acquitted him.
Dealing with the appeal, the top court referred to the testimony of the eldest daughter of the appellant and said she had narrated the incident as she had seen it.
"There is no inconsistency in her statement, and there is no reason to disbelieve her," the bench said.
Referring to the statements of two doctors who had examined the victim, the bench said it proved that the woman was admitted to the hospital in July 2000 and, despite serious injuries, she was in a conscious state.
The bench said there was no adverse material to doubt the dying declaration or to suggest that it was not actually or properly recorded or that the victim was not in a state to make such a statement.
It said the dying declaration was recorded with the permission of the doctor who had given the nod after being satisfied that the victim was in a fit state to make the statement.
"He (the appellant) is the person who picked up a quarrel with his deceased wife, poured kerosene, and burnt her, and that his wife died due to the burn injuries after consciously making a dying declaration and naming the appellant as the main culprit," the bench said while referring to the evidence.
"In view of the above compelling evidence, there is hardly any scope for the acquittal of the appellant," it said, while dismissing the appeal.
The bench said the trial court was not justified in acquitting him on slight discrepancies in the statements of some of the witnesses.
Noting that the appellant was on bail, the bench directed him to surrender immediately to undergo the remaining part of the sentence.
The bench said that the appellant and the victim were married for 17 years before the incident.
It said that they had lived a happy married life for about three years and thereafter, their relations became strained, and it was alleged that the appellant started ill-treating his wife and kept on raising demands for money, which the victim's father fulfilled most of the time.
The prosecution had said in July 2000 that the couple picked up a quarrel and the appellant set her on fire.
The woman was admitted to a hospital and died after three days due to severe burn injuries.
The bench noted that the trial court had acquitted the man primarily on the ground that the bathroom where the incident took place was very small and that two people could not have been accommodated there.