The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for consistency and reliability in dying declarations and oral dying declarations, and the implications of omissions in witness statements.

P. V. HARDAS, J.

( 1 ) THE appellant who is convicted for an offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- with a default stipulation to undergo further R. I. for fifteen days in the event of non-payment of fine, by the 1 st Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Jalgaon, by judgment dated 21-10-2003, by this appeal questions the correctness of the conviction and sentence.

( 2 ) SUCH of the facts as are necessary for the decision of this appeal can briefly be stated thus:- p. W. 8 - P. S. I. Anil Sonawane, attached to the Zilla Peth Police Station, Jalgaon, received a telephonic message from the Civil hospital, Jalgaon on 17-01-2003, regarding admission of one Vimal in the hospital with burn injuries. On receipt of the information, p. W. 8 Sonawane immediately proceeded to the hospital and reached the hospital on 17- 01-2003 at about 1. 00 a. m. He contacted the medical Officer, Dr. Wankhede and informed the Medical Officer that he had come to record the statement of injured Vimal. Dr. Wankhede examined Vimal and opined that vimal was in a fit mental condition to give her statement. P. W. 8 - P. S. I. Sonawane himself questioned Vimal and satisfied himself that Vimal was in a fit condition to give her statement and accordingly recorded her statement at Exh. 27. In the said statement at Exh. 27 Vimal had stated that the appellant had poured kerosene on her and had set her ablaze. P. W. 10 - P. S. I. Arjun Pawar, a Police sub-Inspector attached to Police Station, raver, received the statement of Vimal, recorded by P. W. 8 - P. S. I. Sonawane of the zilla Peth Police Station. On the basis of the said statement P. W. 10 - P. S. I. Pawar registered an offence vide Crime No. 3/2003. After registration of the offence he proceeded to the scene of the offence and drew the scene of the offence panchanama at Exh. 14 in the presence of P. W. 1 Shabbir and P. W. 2 Vikas. From the scene of the offence he seized a kerosene container, pieces of bangle, burnt pieces of cloth, match box, etc. He had lateron sent the seized articles to the Chemical analyser, Aurangabad along with requisition at Exh. 37. The report of the Chemical analyser is at Exh. 38. P. W. 7 Nalini Joshi, an Executive Magistrate at Jalgaon, received a requisition from the Zilla Peth police station on 17-01-2003 for recording the dying declaration of Vimal. The requisition is at exh. 22. She then proceeded to the Civil hospital, Jalgaon and contacted the Casualty medical Officer on duty. The Medical officer examined Vimal and informed her that Vimal was in a fit condition to give her statement and accordingly endorsed so on the sheet of paper. P. W. 7 Nalini Joshi, after a preliminary inquiry with Vimal, recorded the statement of Vimal at Exh. 24. The Medical officer, after conclusion of the recording of the statement, also endorsed on the said declaration. The appellant/accused came to be arrested vide panchanama at Exh. 19 on 20-01-2003 in the presence of P. W. 5 bhagwat. On completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet against the appellant came to be filed and on committal of case to the Court of Sessions, a charge against the appellant, vide Exh. 7, was framed for an offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian penal Code. The appellant/accused, vide his statement at Exh. 8 denied his guilt and claimed to be tried. Prosecution in support of its case examined 11 witnesses. Prosecution relied upon the evidence of p. W. 3 Suman, sister of deceased Vimal and p. W. 6 Onkar, brother of deceased Vimal, to whom Vimal is alleged to have made oral dying declaration. Prosecution also relied on the evidence of P. W. 7 Nalini Joshi and P. W. 8 - P. S. I. Sonawane had recorded the dying declaration at Exhs. 24 and 27, respectively. Prosecution also relied on the testimony of p. W. 9 Dr. Rahul Patil and P. W. 11 Dr. Sunil narkhede who had examined deceased Vimal and had opined that she was