The dying declaration, when trustworthy and reliable, can be the sole basis for convicting the accused. The court also emphasized the importance of considering exterior circumstances in imposing a sentence.

B.A. PATIL, J.

1. The present appeal is filed by the accused challenging the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Davanagere in SC.No.83/2012 dated 6/12.8.2014.

2. I have heard Sri D.Nagaraja Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the appellant-accused and Sri Vijayakumar Majage, learned Additional SPP for the respondent-State.

3. Case of the prosecution in brief is that accused got married Shailaja, the sister of the deceased. After some time, Shailaja committed suicide by leaving two children and thereafter Lakshmi, the sister of the deceased Shailaja was given in marriage to the accused and she gave birth to a female child. Thereafter, the accused-appellant started ill-treating and harassing Lakshmi by suspecting her fidelity and subjected her to both mental and physical cruelty and also used to assault her. In that light, on 9.2.2012 at about 8.00 p.m. when the deceased Lakshmi called accused for meals, he picked up quarrel and abused her in filthy language by saying that he does not want any meals and she can provide the same to her male friend (boyfriend). In that connection, being fed up by the ill-treatment and harassment, the deceased Lakshmi herself poured kerosene on her body and at that time, the appellant-accused with an intention to take away her life, set fire on her with a matchstick. After hearing her hue and cry, the neighbourers came and extinguished the fire and immediately, she was shifted to CG Hospital, Davanagere. When she was under treatment, her dying declaration was recorded by the Tahsildar and a case has been registered. On 16.2.2012 at about 10.00 p.m., injured Lakshmi succumbed to the burn injures. After completion of investigation, the charge sheet has been filed.

4. After filing of the charge sheet, the learned Magistrate took cognizance and after following the procedure under Section 209 of Cr.P.C., the case was committed to the Sessions Court. The Sessions Court took cognizance and secured the presence of the accused who was in judicial custody. After hearing the learned PP and the learned counsel for the accused, the charge was framed read over and explained to the accused, who pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried and as such the trial was fixed.

5. In order to prove its cases, the prosecution in all has examined 23 witnesses and got marked 25 Exhibits and 3 Material Objects. After closure of the prosecution case the accused was examined by putting incriminating material as against him. Accused has not led any evidence. However, during the course of cross-examination, Ex.D1 was got marked on his behalf. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the trial Court came to the conclusion that the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt and convicted the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 498A and 302 of IPC and sentenced him to undergo RI for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- in default of payment of the fine amount, to undergo SI for a period of one year for the offence punishable under Section 498A of IPC. In so far as the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC is concerned, the trial Court sentenced the accused to undergo imprisonment for life, till his last breath and to pay a fine of Rs.25,000/-, in default of payment of the fine amount, to undergo RI for two years. Challenging the legality and correctness of the said judgment and order, the accused is before this Court.

6. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the accused-appellant are that the impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence is perverse and not sustainable in law. The trial Court has not considered the records which clearly go to show that the deceased Lakshmi sustained burn injuries due to stove burst and the said aspect has not been accepted by the trial Court. He further submitted that the alleged incident has taken place on 9.2.2012. Though the injured was conscio