Tag Archives: #keralahc

Case title: Eby@Philip Ninan Vs State of Kerala

Case no.: Criminal Appeal No. 139 of 2017

Order on: April 2nd, 2024

Quoram: Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Kauser Edappagath

Facts of the case

The case pertains to the offence of uxoricide. The appellant Eby @Philip Ninan and his wife were residing along with their two babies at Thrissillery. It was alleged that the appellant killed his 24-year-old wife Elsy (victim) by setting her on fire with a motive to sell their house and property which was previously refused by the deceased. The prosecution case was that the appellant with the intention of killing his wife poured kerosene on her head and set her ablaze. The victim, who suffered serious burns all over her body, was rushed to the Hospital, but eventually succumbed to the injuries.

The trial court, after a full-fledged trial, found the appellant guilty under Section 302 of IPC, mainly relying on the dying declaration given by the victim while she was undergoing treatment at the Hospital. The appellant contested this decision before the High Court.

Contentions of the Appellant

The Appellant contended that the injuries were not sustained by the victim in the manner and fashion alleged by the prosecution. Instead, he stated that the injuries were due to the act of self-immolation by the victim and he was not responsible for it. It was contended that the victim sustained burn injuries when she attempted to set herself ablaze by pouring kerosene on her body following a rift with the appellant. While the accused attempted to save her, he also suffered burn injuries. The Counsel defending these contentions submitted that dying declarations of the victim cannot be considered as the victim was not in a fit state of mind to make the statements.

Contentions of the Respondents

The Prosecutor presented two statements given by the deceased and her mother. The Victim in Ext. 3 stated that the appellant set her ablaze after pouring kerosene. Further her mother stated that as and when she reached the hospital on the night of the incident, the deceased told her that it was the appellant who set her on fire. The prosecution heavily relied on these two statements and regarded them as dying declarations falling under Section 32(1) of the Evidence Act to prove its case. Further, submitted that the materials on record indicated that the victim was conscious and capable of giving the statement, and hence the same cannot be discarded merely on the absence of independent medical evidence to prove the state of mind of the victim.

Legal Provisions

Section 302 of IPC – It deals with punishment for murder

Section 32 of Evidence Act – It deals with statements made by a deceased person regarding the cause of their death or the circumstances leading to it.

Issue – The Evidentiary value and the Reliability of the said Dying declarations were strongly assailed before the Bench.

Court’s Analysis and Judgement

The Court noted the statements given by the witnesses and examined the autopsy and other reports placed on record. Further, delving into Section 32 of the Evidence Act which deals with relevance of the statement (dying declarations) given by dead persons, drew a distinction between the English Law and Indian Law on the admissibility of such statements. While in the former, it is immaterial whether the person who makes it was or was not under the expectation of death at the time of declaration, the latter strictly provides that the declarant should have been in actual danger of death and should be expecting an imminent death.

The sanctity of dying declaration is justifies in twofold: firstly, ethically and religiously it is presumed that a person while at the brink of death will not lie, secondly from a public policy perspective it is to tackle a situation where the only witness to the crime is not available. However, the Court must ascertain that the statement of the deceased was not because of either tutoring or prompting or a product of imagination and is made in a fit state of mind. It thus, noted that these two factors play a vital role in admissibility and reliability of the dying declaration. The Court asserted that a dying declaration can be the sole basis of the conviction if it is made in a fit mental state, but in case of any suspicion as to its veracity it would be considered only as a piece of evidence.

The Court, analyzing the circumstances of the case in the light of above principles and various authorities ruled that none of the dying declarations relied on by the prosecution passed the test of its acceptability and reliability and as such there is no convincing evidence to prove that the victim was in a fit state of mind when those declarations were made. Further, the statement of the deceased mother was termed as hearsay which is inadmissible. The Kerala High Court thus held that the evidence of the witnesses on record were insufficient to prove the guilt of the appellant and extended the benefit of doubt to him. Therefore, it set aside the impugned order of the Trial Court and acquitted the appellant. The Court through this decision cleared the line on the interpretation of Section 32 and broadly determined the factors mitigating the reliability and admissibility of dying declarations.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Judgement Reviewed by – Keerthi K

Click here to view the Judgement