Nagabhushan v. The State of Karnataka
Background
The appellant's wife died of burn injuries within a few years of their marriage, and the prosecution alleged he poured kerosene on her and set her alight after a quarrel linked to dowry demands, while the defence claimed the fire was accidental and that he was burned himself while trying to save her. The trial court acquitted the appellant (and two co-accused) after finding contradictions between two dying declarations: an earlier one supporting the accident theory and a later one implicating the accused. The Karnataka High Court, in the State's appeal, reversed the acquittal of the husband alone, relying on the later dying declaration (Exhibit P5) as reliable, and convicted him under Sections 498A and 302 read with 34 IPC; he then appealed to the Supreme Court.
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court held that the High Court was justified in appreciating the evidence afresh and reversing the acquittal because the trial court's view disbelieving the later dying declaration was not a plausible one, given that Exhibit P5 inspired confidence and was corroborated by surrounding evidence. On the argument that the accused's attempt to extinguish the fire showed absence of intent to kill, the Court relied on precedent (Santosh v. State of Maharashtra) to hold that pouring kerosene and setting a person ablaze is an act so imminently dangerous that it falls within clause "Fourthly" of Section 300 IPC regardless of a later, possibly self-serving, attempt to put out the fire. Emphasising that courts must deal sternly with bride-burning cases where guilt is proved beyond reasonable doubt, the Court upheld the conviction and dismissed the appeal.
Lesson Learnt
In dowry-death/bride-burning cases, a later dying declaration that is credible and corroborated can outweigh an earlier, contradictory one, and a perpetrator's belated attempt to extinguish a fire he started does not by itself reduce murder to a lesser offence.