IMPORTANT POINT
Principles for appreciating dying declaration reiterated.

JUDGMENT

Ranjan Gogoi, J.-This Appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 08/02/2007 passed by the High Court of Bombay whereby the High Court has dismissed the Criminal Appeal filed by the appellant and confirmed the conviction recorded against the appellant under Section 302 IPC by the learned Trial Court. Following the aforesaid conviction, the accused- appellant has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for life along with fine.

2. The short case of the prosecution, inter-alia, is that the deceased Nazabi was wife of the accused-appellant. They were staying in the house of PW 1, Akbar Sheikh, who is father of the deceased. According to the prosecution, at about 8.00 – 8.30 PM of 04.09.2001, PW 1 was sitting outside the house. At that time, there was some altercation going on inside between the accused-appellant and the deceased. Thereafter, the deceased came out and was sitting with her father. After sometime, the accused-appellant called the deceased inside and locked the door of the house. There was again a quarrel between the accused and the deceased in the course of which the accused poured kerosene on the deceased and set her on fire. According to the prosecution, the deceased came running out of the house in a burning condition and was followed by the accused who fled away from there. PW 1 along with PW 3 and PW 5 extinguished the fire and in the presence of the said witnesses, on being asked by PW 1, the deceased stated that she had been set on fire by the accused-appellant. Thereafter, according to the prosecution, the deceased was taken to the hospital where her statement was recorded by the doctor who informed the police of the incident. PW 6, Laxman, police constable, recorded the statement of the deceased at about 4.30 AM of 05.09.2001. Shortly thereafter at about 9.40 AM, the deceased, Nazabi, died. Inquest was held and the dead body was sent for postmortem examination. Thereafter, the First Information Report (Exhibit 10) was lodged by PW 1, Akbar Sheikh.

3. After registration of the case, investigation was conducted by PW 5 in the course of which, PW 5 seized from the place of occurrence a plastic can containing kerosene; a match box with two burnt match sticks; broken pieces of bangles; samples of earth smelling kerosene; half burnt polyester sari etc. The said items were sent for chemical analysis. The report of analysis confirmed the presence of kerosene in all the said items. At the conclusion of the investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against the accused-appellant under Section 302 IPC. Charge under Sec. 302 IPC having been framed against the accused-appellant, the accused pleaded not guilty and wanted to be tried. In the course of trial, 7 witnesses were examined by the prosecution and none by the defence. From the statement made by the accused in his examination under Section 313 Cr. P.C., it appears that the case of the accused-appellant was that the deceased had set herself on fire due to an altercation with her brother, who did not approve of the deceased staying in the house of her father. In fact, according to the accused, he had tried to put out the fire and was attacked by his brother-in-law resulting in injuries, which, the accused claims to have reported to the police. At conclusion of the trial held against the accused, the learned trial court, on the grounds and reasons mentioned, found him guilty of the offence under Section 302 IPC and accordingly, sentenced him to undergo RI for life along with fine. The said conviction and sentence having been affirmed by the High Court in appeal, the present appeal has been filed by the accused upon grant of leave by this Court.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the principal basis of the conviction recorded against the accused is the statement of the deceased recorded by PW 6, the police constable which has been treated by the courts below as a dying declaration. Pointing out the evidence of PW 1, it has been urge