The judgment and order of conviction dated 09.01.2012 passed by the Sessions Judge, Bagalkot, in S.C.No.27/2011 is called in question in this appeal. By the said judgment, appellant-accused No.1 has been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 498A and 302 of IPC and accordingly, sentence was imposed on the appellant-accused No.1 and accused Nos.2 to 4 were acquitted. It is submitted by both the sides that as against the acquittal of accused Nos.2 to 4, no appeal has been preferred by the State.

2. The brief facts of the prosecution case as per the complaint Ex.P6 that P.W.4, who is the father of the deceased has lodged the complaint stating that he is a resident of Rampur in Lingasgur Taluk and he is having two daughters, viz., Hulgamma and deceased Devamma, and one son, namely, Hulgappa. 89 years back, deceased Devamma has been given in marriage to accused No.1 of Hirekodagali village and she begotten a son and a daughter. Accused No.2 is the brother, accused No.3 is the mother of accused No.1 and accused No.4 is the wife of brother of accused No.1 and deceased was residing along with her inlaws. It is further alleged that accused used to quarrel with the deceased for silly reasons. Hence, the deceased started to reside separately along with accused No.1 and there also accused used to quarrel with deceased Devamma. On 19.12.2010, in the night at about 11 p.m. one Timmanna Harijan, the uncle of accused No.1 informed the complainant that due to altercation between accused No.1 and his deceased daughter, deceased Devamma set herself ablaze in her house and admitted in Ilkal Government Hospital for treatment. Immediately, the comlpainant along with his wife and relatives went to the Ilkal Government Hospital and they were informed that the deceased was taken to District Government Hospital, Bagalkot. They came to Bagalkot and saw the deceased, who had completely sustained burn injuries and on enquiry, she told that due to the illtreatment given by accused Nos.1 to 4, in the night at 10.30 p.m. she herself poured kerosene and set fire to herself. She further told that accused No.1 also sustained burn injury when he attempted to extinguish the fire and her daughter also sustained burn injuries on her leg and back. On these allegations FIR was registered against accused Nos.1 to 4 at the first instance for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 323, 504, 498A read with Section 34 of IPC. On 27.12.2010, when the death of Devamma took place, as per the requisition made by the Police, the offence under Section 302 of IPC is also inserted in the case.

3. To prove its case, prosecution in all examined 25 witnesses as P.W1 to P.W25 and got marked documents Exs.P1 to P39 and material objects M.Os.1 to 4. On the side of the defence, no witnesses were examined, but two documents as per Ex.D1 and Ex.D2 got marked.

4. We have heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the appellant-accused No.1 and also the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant during the course of his arguments has submitted that the entire case of the prosecution is based on the dying declaration (Ex.P17) said to have been given by the deceased Devamma before the Taluka Executive Magistrate. It is his submission that the evidence placed on record by the prosecution shows that no such dying declaration has been given by the deceased and it is created by the prosecution to suit its case. The evidence on record shows that while recording the dying declaration, the parents i.e. P.W4 and P.W10 were also present. The evidence of the concerned Police Officers and the Medical Officers shows that requisition was given to Taluka Executive Magistrate on 20.12.2010 requesting him to record the dying declaration of the deceased Devamma. But, it is the contention of the learned counsel that on 20.12.2010 the dying declaration was not recorded by the Tahasildar, because the Doctor, who w