Summary
The Court partly reversed acquittals in an acid-attack murder case. The victim’s proved written complaint operated as a dying declaration, supported by witnesses and medical evidence; explained reporting delay and investigative lapses did not justify acquitting the principal assailant. His murder conviction was restored with life imprisonment rather than death. The other accused’s acquittal remained because his murderous common intention was not proved.
Issues
- Whether delay and investigative defects undermined the proved dying declaration.
- Whether the two accused’s roles warranted the same result.
- What sentence was justified for the principal assailant.
Held
- The victim’s helpless circumstances explained the delayed written report. The missing envelope and failure to record a formal dying declaration did not displace the proved complaint and corroboration; merely speculative doubts could not replace reasonable assessment. (¶¶ 14–18, 22)
- The evidence established the principal assailant’s murder offence. For the other accused, lack of a specific acid-attack role, motive or proved common intention left a reasonable possibility that his presence concerned pressure to withdraw the earlier complaint. (¶¶ 19, 22–23)
- Errors in charge particulars mattered only with actual misleading and failure of justice, and the Section 313 examination was adequate on this record. (¶ 20–21)
- Life imprisonment was adequate; no criminal history or continuing threat was shown and the earlier rape charge had resulted in acquittal. Death was not restored. Ramana J. concurred, stressing professional medical records, dying declarations and diligent investigation. (¶¶ 24–25, Ramana J., 1–10)
Result
Appeals partly allowed: principal assailant convicted under Section 302 and sentenced to life with ten-thousand-rupee fine, default two years’ rigorous imprisonment, and directed to surrender. Other accused’s acquittal affirmed.