Penal Code, 1860–Sec. 302–Evidence Act, 1872–Sec. 32–Two dying declarations of deceased–Trial Court relied upon the second dying declaration which was recorded by the Magistrate/SDM–Nothing on record to show that the Magistrate/SDM was biased or interested in recording the dying declaration against the accused–In the first dying declaration, it was stated that the deceased herself poured the kerosene and the door was locked from inside–However, it is not stated that how she was taken to the hospital–Observation of trial Court that if she had committed the suicide by pouring the kerosene,
there would have been injuries on the chest, and would not have been on the head and on the backside–Deceased was fully conscious and capable of comprehending the questions put forth to her when the second dying declaration was made–It was accompanied with the certificate of doctor–Held, trial Court rightly placed the reliance on the second dying declaration–Impugned judgment of acquittal, passed by the High Court deserves to be
quashed and set aside.
