Calcutta High Court Acquits In-Laws In Alleged Dowry Death Case, Finds Child Witness Testimony Unreliable
The Calcutta High Court has set aside the conviction and life sentence imposed on the appellants in a case relating to the alleged burning death of a married woman, holding that the prosecution failed to establish their culpability beyond a reasonable doubt.
The Division Bench of Justice Rajasekhar Mantha and Justice Ajay Kumar Gupta found serious inconsistencies in the prosecution evidence, unreliable testimony of child witnesses, unexplained investigative lapses, and material omissions in the inquest report, all of which cumulatively rendered the conviction unsustainable.
The appellants had been convicted by the Trial Court under Sections 302/34 and 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code for allegedly pouring kerosene on the victim and setting her on fire. The High Court noted at the outset that the victim had died nearly fourteen years after marriage and had been living separately from her in-laws for over thirteen years, thereby excluding the statutory presumption under Section 304B IPC and requiring the prosecution to strictly prove homicidal intent and participation of the accused.
The Court examined the evidence of the victim's father, who lodged the complaint, and observed that he was not present at the place of occurrence and his testimony lacked independent corroboration. The inquest report did not name the appellants or indicate any allegation of torture or harassment, and the post-mortem doctor was unable to conclusively opine whether the death was homicidal due to the absence of the victim's wearing apparel at the time of examination.
A significant part of the prosecution case rested on the testimony of two minor sons of the deceased, examined as PW-2 and PW-8. The High Court found that the trial court had failed to conduct a proper preliminary examination of the child witnesses as mandated under Section 118 of the Evidence Act. The questions put to the children were not recorded, nor was there any judicial satisfaction recorded regarding their understanding of the duty to speak the truth. Relying on recent Supreme Court precedents, the Bench held that such mechanical examination rendered their testimony only partly reliable.
The Court further found material contradictions in the versions given by the two child witnesses regarding how the incident occurred, whether the victim's hands were tied, and the role attributed to the appellants. Their testimony was also found inconsistent with medical evidence, the inquest report, and surrounding circumstances, including the improbability of the in-laws immediately arriving at the place of occurrence given their separate residence and strained relations with the victim's husband.
The High Court also took note of serious investigative lapses, including non-examination of treating doctors, non-seizure and non-production of hospital bed-head tickets, contradictions regarding the extent of burn injuries, and delay in forwarding the FIR to the jurisdictional Magistrate. The omission of the appellants' names in the inquest report, despite their alleged central role in the crime, was held to be a significant circumstance casting doubt on the prosecution's version, in line with the Supreme Court's decision in Balaka Singh v. State of Punjab.
Observing that the chain of circumstances was incomplete and that the prosecution appeared to have withheld material witnesses, the Court held that the implication of the appellants seemed to be an afterthought. The Bench concluded that the prosecution had failed to prove either participation or culpability of the appellants, even remotely, let alone beyond reasonable doubt.
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the criminal appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence, and directed the release of the appellants, subject to compliance with Section 437A of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Case: Sk. Morsed Ali & Ors. Versus The State of West Bengal
Case No: C.R.A. 130 of 2016