Upholding Conviction: Analyzing Dying Declarations in Arson Case

Facts

Witnesses reached Nandabai’s residence and questioned her about the injuries
Nandabai implicated the appellants and Seventibai as the perpetrators
Seventibai and Kalabai convicted under Section 302 read with Section 147
Natwar, Hosilal, and Gaurabai convicted under Section 302 read with Section 149 and Section 147 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860

Also Read: Analysis of Bail Conditions in Criminal Appeal No. INSC 48/2024

Tarabai (PW-1) is an innocent villager who may not understand the legal significance of the physical presence of other appellants.
Dying declarations by multiple witnesses corroborate the account of Nandabai’s dying declaration.
Evidence suggests that Seventibai and the appellants were present during the incident and were involved in pouring kerosene oil and setting the fire.
The dying declaration recorded by Ravi Shankar (PW-13) names Seventibai and the appellants as the perpetrators.
The testimony of Jagan (PW-15) further corroborates the written dying declaration by Ravi Shankar (PW-13).
Evidence from witnesses like Munna Lal (PW-3) and Kailash (PW-5) supports the events leading to the burn injuries.
Seizures made by Baldev Singh Thakur (PW-17) and statements from various witnesses contribute to establishing the chain of events.
The motive behind the crime is linked to the appellants’ belief that Nandabai defamed Gaurabai.
Medical reports and testimonies confirm the cause of death for Nandabai and her daughters.
The prosecution heavily relies on the dying declarations of Nandabai to establish the case against the appellants.
Alleged discrepancies contended by the learned counsel for the appellants are minor in nature.
Discrepancies do not impact the court testimony of the witnesses on the oral and recorded dying declaration of Nandabai.
The conviction of the appellants is upheld, along with the sentence awarded to them.