Patna High Court Acquits Accused, Questions “Capacity of Victim to Make Coherent Statement” with 100% Burn Injuries

Subheadline: Convictions under Sections 302/34 and 498-A IPC overturned due to inconsistencies in evidence and procedural irregularities.

The Patna High Court has acquitted Mahesh Pandit and Shiv Pujan Pandit, who were convicted for the dowry-related death of Lalita Devi, citing substantial doubts about the authenticity of the dying declaration and highlighting procedural lapses. The court’s decision underscores the importance of scrutinizing evidence, especially in serious allegations involving dowry deaths.

The case arose from the death of Lalita Devi, who succumbed to burn injuries on May 19, 2014, after being allegedly set on fire by her husband, Mahesh Pandit, and father-in-law, Shiv Pujan Pandit, due to unmet dowry demands. The trial court had convicted the accused under Sections 302/34 (murder) and 498-A (cruelty) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), relying heavily on the victim’s dying declaration recorded at Arwal Hospital.

The bench, comprising Justices Ashutosh Kumar and Jitendra Kumar, expressed serious doubts regarding the reliability of the dying declaration. “The postmortem and hospital records indicate that the deceased had 100% burn injuries. Under such circumstances, the capacity of the victim to make a coherent and detailed statement implicating the appellants is questionable,” the bench noted. This inconsistency was pivotal in the court’s decision to question the authenticity of the dying declaration.

The court also examined the testimonies of key witnesses, including the victim’s brother and the attending doctor. The statements of these witnesses presented inconsistencies regarding the victim’s ability to communicate after sustaining severe burn injuries. “The police did not record the victim’s statement at her matrimonial home, and there was a significant delay in sending the FIR to the magistrate, which further complicates the credibility of the evidence,” the court observed.

Highlighting procedural irregularities, the court noted the absence of independent witness testimonies and the failure to recover burnt articles from the scene. “The delay in recording the victim’s statement and sending the FIR, coupled with the lack of corroborative evidence, raises substantial doubt about the prosecution’s case,” the judgment stated. The court emphasized that a dying declaration must be free from any doubt, especially when it forms the primary basis for conviction.

Justice Ashutosh Kumar remarked, “Given the extent of the burn injuries and the procedural lapses in the investigation, we cannot conclusively rely on the dying declaration. The benefit of the doubt must be extended to the appellants.”

The High Court’s decision to acquit the accused highlights the judiciary’s duty to ensure that convictions are based on reliable and consistent evidence. This judgment emphasizes the need for meticulous adherence to procedural standards, particularly in cases involving severe charges like dowry deaths. The acquittal sends a strong message about the importance of credibility and procedural integrity in the administration of justice.

Date of Decision: June 24, 2024