( 1 ) CHALLENGING the conviction and sentence in S. C. No. 12 of 2003 on the file of the Court of the II Additional sessions Judge, Kadapa at Proddatur dated 6-2-2004 wherein the appellant, who is the sole accused, was found guilty under Section 302, IPC and convicted under Section 235 (2), Cr. P. C. , and was sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of rs. 1000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for three months, this appeal is preferred.

( 2 ) THE brief facts that are necessary for disposal of the appeal may be stated as follows : the case of the prosecution is that the deceased Thippiripati Nette Kattamma was the concubine of the accused. Her marriage was performed ten years back, but she herself separated from her husband and living with the accused. She was an employee in zuari Cement Factory and she was due a sum of Rs. 50,000/- to her creditors. On 28-3-2002 at about 8. 30 p. m. at Railway kottalu, Yerraguntla the accused came to her house in a drunken condition and asked to give Rs. 30,000/-, which was kept in her box. When she refused, the accused threatened to kill her by pouring kerosene. She refused to give the amount. Then the accused poured kerosene on her and set fire to her and ran away. Her neighbours extinguished the flames and intimated to the police. Police shifted the deceased to Government Hospital where she succumbed to the injuries. Thereby he committed the offence punishable under Section 302, IPC. The Judicial I Class Magistrate took cognizance of the case in Crime No. 26 of 2002 as p. R. C. No. 17 of 2002 and committed the same to the Court of Session. After receipt of committal record, the same was registered as Sessions Case No. 12 of 2003 and made over to the II Additional Sessions Judge, kadapa at Proddatur, and after hearing both sides the learned Sessions Judge framed a charge under Section 302, IPC against the accused, which was read over to him in telugu, for that the accused pleaded not guilty.

( 3 ) IN support of the case of the prosecution, the prosecution examined PWs-1 to 14 and Exs. P. 1 to P. 14 were marked. None was examined on behalf of the accused.

( 4 ) ACCEPTING the two dying declarations recorded, i. e. , one by the police and the other by the Magistrate, the learned Sessions judge found the accused guilty for the offence punishable under Section 302, IPC, convicted him under Section 235 (2 ). Cr. P. C. and sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. Aggrieved by the same, the accused preferred the present criminal appeal.

( 5 ) THE learned senior counsel Sri C. Padmanabha Reddy contended that there is no direct evidence to show that the accused poured kerosene and set fire to the deceased and the entire case rests upon the two dying declarations recorded by PWs-13 and 9 and the reasoning given by the deceased in the abovesaid two dying declarations was that the accused insisted to give Rs. 30,000/-, which was withdrawn by her from the Rayalaseema Grarneena Bank, and when she refused to give the same, the incident took place. PW-14 admitted that she does not have any account in any neighbouring banks. When there is no account the question of withdrawing of Rs. 30,000/- from the bank one day prior to the incident does not arise. Therefore, when the two dying declarations brought into existence in the suspicious circumstances, in the absence of any corroborative evidence to those dying declarations, the accused cannot be convicted. Another view is also possible from the evidence adduced by the prosecution tnat pws-1 and 2 admitted that the deceased due money to various persons, and the deceased herself committed suicide unable to discharge her debts. The earliest version given by PW-1 to the police would clearly reveal that it is a case where the deceased committed suicide by pouring kerosene on her body. He further contended that the doctor, who issued