<p>New Delhi: The Supreme Court acquitted a man of charges of killing his woman friend and colleague by setting her ablaze after pouring petrol.</p><p>The court disbelieved four dying declarations due to gaps and found no other materials to prove the allegations.</p><p>A bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Sanjay Karol set aside the Delhi High Court as well as trial court's judgements which had convicted Abhishek Sharma, then a customer care executive, in the case of murder of operation manager Mandeep Kaur (22) of a telecom firm around midnight on September 20-21, 2007.</p><p>"We do not find even a scintilla of evidence by which we may uphold the judgments of the courts below," the bench said.</p>.SC sets aside Gauhati HC order nullifying BJP MLA's election for concealing info on properties.<p>According to the prosecution, in view of friendship, the accused used to drop the deceased at home. "However, a quarrel took place between them on the way. As the victim used to show likings towards their boss instead to the accused, he took her to an open space, and set her afire in the midst of arguments."</p><p>The court, however, said apart from alleged dying declarations, there was no evidence on record to point to the guilt of the convict-appellant. </p><p>"It is an established principle that a dying declaration, if it is free of tutoring, prompting, etc. can form the sole basis of conviction," the bench said. </p><p>Pointing towards gaps in the prosecution case, the bench said nothing on record indicated the ownership of a vehicle by the convict-appellant; any animosity of an extreme nature to set her on fire; any connection of inflammable substance used to kill the victim with the appellant like the record of purchase.</p><p>The bench said that the crime in question occurred at an open public place, and that cast doubt on the prosecution case.</p><p>The court also pointed out that until six days prior to her death when the victim was put on life support, there was no effort to record her statement before the Magistrate.</p><p>The court rejected four dying declarations, first one recorded by the police officer in PCR duty who took the victim to the hospital, the second one by the doctor who examined the victim and prepared MLC, the third one by a police Sub Inspector based on which, the FIR was lodged and the last by the victim to her mother.</p><p>"Placing the gauntlet of guilt upon the convict-appellant based on dying declarations when no other material particulars, apart from his name, could be elicited therefrom would be unjustified. Furthermore, when considering other circumstances that may or may not point to the guilt of the convict-appellant, we find gaps unexplained in the prosecution case, which cast sufficient doubt as to leave the case short of the threshold of beyond reasonable doubt," the bench said.</p>
<p>New Delhi: The Supreme Court acquitted a man of charges of killing his woman friend and colleague by setting her ablaze after pouring petrol.</p><p>The court disbelieved four dying declarations due to gaps and found no other materials to prove the allegations.</p><p>A bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Sanjay Karol set aside the Delhi High Court as well as trial court's judgements which had convicted Abhishek Sharma, then a customer care executive, in the case of murder of operation manager Mandeep Kaur (22) of a telecom firm around midnight on September 20-21, 2007.</p><p>"We do not find even a scintilla of evidence by which we may uphold the judgments of the courts below," the bench said.</p>.SC sets aside Gauhati HC order nullifying BJP MLA's election for concealing info on properties.<p>According to the prosecution, in view of friendship, the accused used to drop the deceased at home. "However, a quarrel took place between them on the way. As the victim used to show likings towards their boss instead to the accused, he took her to an open space, and set her afire in the midst of arguments."</p><p>The court, however, said apart from alleged dying declarations, there was no evidence on record to point to the guilt of the convict-appellant. </p><p>"It is an established principle that a dying declaration, if it is free of tutoring, prompting, etc. can form the sole basis of conviction," the bench said. </p><p>Pointing towards gaps in the prosecution case, the bench said nothing on record indicated the ownership of a vehicle by the convict-appellant; any animosity of an extreme nature to set her on fire; any connection of inflammable substance used to kill the victim with the appellant like the record of purchase.</p><p>The bench said that the crime in question occurred at an open public place, and that cast doubt on the prosecution case.</p><p>The court also pointed out that until six days prior to her death when the victim was put on life support, there was no effort to record her statement before the Magistrate.</p><p>The court rejected four dying declarations, first one recorded by the police officer in PCR duty who took the victim to the hospital, the second one by the doctor who examined the victim and prepared MLC, the third one by a police Sub Inspector based on which, the FIR was lodged and the last by the victim to her mother.</p><p>"Placing the gauntlet of guilt upon the convict-appellant based on dying declarations when no other material particulars, apart from his name, could be elicited therefrom would be unjustified. Furthermore, when considering other circumstances that may or may not point to the guilt of the convict-appellant, we find gaps unexplained in the prosecution case, which cast sufficient doubt as to leave the case short of the threshold of beyond reasonable doubt," the bench said.</p>
