A Mumbai sessions court has brought a dramatic close to a legal saga spanning over three decades, acquitting a 64-year-old man accused of setting a woman ablaze in 1990 after she reportedly rejected his marriage proposal. The court's verdict marks the end of a 36-year battle, highlighting a catastrophic collapse of the prosecution's case due to lost evidence and the passage of time.
The Case Collapse: Missing Evidence and Lost Witnesses
The acquittal of the accused, Desmand Miranda, from Kalina, was primarily driven by the total disintegration of the prosecution's arguments over the years. The judge pointed to a severe lack of direct evidence, stating the available record was insufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Critical pieces of evidence, including the original FIR, panchnama records, and post-mortem notes, could not be traced by the time the case reached its conclusion.
Decades of delay proved fatal to the case. The physical evidence, or 'muddemal', was reportedly damaged and unavailable for examination. Furthermore, several key witnesses, including neighbours and family members, died before they could provide testimony in court. This left gaping holes in the narrative the prosecution tried to build.
Contradictions and the Missing Dying Declaration
Central to the court's decision were the contradictory accounts surrounding the victim's statements. The victim, Natalin D'souza, succumbed to her injuries five days after the incident on November 16, 1990, at Nanavati Hospital. While the informant—her brother-in-law, Joseph Coutinho—claimed she later named Miranda as her attacker, the court noted her initial statements to police and doctors suggested a suicide attempt.
The judge observed that the alleged dying declaration implicating Miranda was never formally proved during the trial. Adding to the reasonable doubt, forensic reports showed no kerosene residue on Miranda's clothing, and there were no physical signs of a struggle or burn marks on his person, which would be expected in such a violent altercation.
A Tragedy Revisited: The Allegations and the Final Ruling
The case dated back to November 11, 1990. Miranda, a friend of Natalin's brother, visited her residence in Kalina. Natalin's husband had passed away 11 years prior. The prosecution alleged that an argument erupted after Natalin refused to serve him a meal and rejected his marriage proposal. It was claimed Miranda then slapped her, locked the doors, and set her ablaze using kerosene and a matchstick.
Miranda absconded after the incident and was only arrested in 2025, leading to the protracted legal process. The judge also cast doubt on the testimony of Natalin's daughter, who was only ten years old at the time, noting it contained improvements and was largely hearsay.
In his ruling, the judge emphasized that an accused cannot be convicted merely on suspicion, especially in the absence of original documents and clear, convincing evidence. This principle ultimately secured the acquittal, closing a chapter on a tragedy that remained legally unresolved for 36 years.
