Revisiting the Scope of Revisional Jurisdiction in Acquittal Appeals: The Case of Accidental Fire.


The present appeal of Khaja Mohaideen & Another v/s The State Of Tamil Nadu & Another challenges a High Court order that reversed a trial court's acquittal of the appellants (accused). The appellants were charged with offenses related to dowry harassment and abetment of suicide. The trial court had found the accused not guilty after reviewing all evidence.

The High Court, however, set aside the acquittal, stating that the trial court had failed to properly consider a dying declaration made by the deceased. It then sent the case back to the trial court for a fresh review.


 

 

The appellants' counsel argued that the High Court exceeded its revisional jurisdiction by re-evaluating the evidence, which is typically not permitted. They contended that the dying declaration itself, when read in full, supported the defense's position that the fire was a tragic accident, not a deliberate act. The declaration mentioned that the deceased and her family suffered burn injuries because a gas regulator was left open overnight. 

The counsel for the respondent (complainant) and the State, however, argued that the High Court was justified in its action, claiming the trial court had overlooked key evidence, including a statement from the deceased's father about prior harassment.

After reviewing the facts, the court concluded that the dying declaration did not contain any accusations against the husband. Furthermore, the court noted that the scientific report indicated the gas cylinder was in the bedroom and the entire family was injured, supporting the claim of an accident. The court deemed it a "futile exercise" to send the case back to the trial court and, therefore, overturned the High Court's order, restoring the acquittal of the appellants.


Section 109., Indian Penal Code - 1860  

Section 306., Indian Penal Code - 1860  

Section 498A., Indian Penal Code - 1860  

Indian Penal Code, 1860