JUDGMENT :

Vibha Kankanwadi, J.

1. Present Appeal has been filed by the original accused challenging his conviction by the learned Sessions Judge, Beed dated 28th August 2014 in Sessions Case No.15 of 2013 thereby holding him guilty of committing offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months.

2. The prosecution story, in short, is that deceased Sunita, aged 25 years was the wife of present appellant. They got married about four years prior to 9th October 2012. Accused was serving as a tractor driver and was addicted to liquor. He used to assault deceased under the influence of liquor and used to raise suspicion over her character. Because of his such behaviour, Sunita had gone to her parents house for about a month prior to 9th October 2012. However, accused went on Thursday prior to 9th October 2012 to her father’s house in Ranjani Kelwandi, Taluka-Pathardi, District-Ahmednagar and fetched her back. Thereafter the incident took place on Monday i.e. 8th October 2012. Sunita had prepared the food around 7.00 to 8.00 p.m. Her husband came in drunken condition and started assaulting her. He poured kerosene on her person from the Can and set her on fire by igniting the match stick. Accused had tried to do the same thing in the afternoon also but at that time Sunita had ran away. When Sunita was put to fire in the night time, she started shouting. Her brother-in-law tried to extinguish the fire and then called her husband. Thereafter they both took her to hospital. When she was admitted in Civil Hospital, Ahmednagar, her dying declaration came to be recorded between 00.40 a.m. to 1.15 a.m. by the Executive Magistrate. On the basis of the said dying declaration, offence came to be registered vide Crime No.128 of 2012 with Ashti Police Station, District-Beed and investigation was taken up.

3. During the course of investigation, panchnama of the spot was carried out, certain articles were seized from the spot, accused came to be arrested. His clothes came to be seized by drawing panchnama. Statements of witnesses were recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The seized articles were sent to chemical analyzer for the purpose of analysis. Unfortunately Sunita expired on 12th October 2012. Inquest panchnama was prepared. Dead body was sent for postmortem and after the report, Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code came to be added. Upon completion of the investigation, charge-sheet was filed. After committal of the case, the trial was conducted. The prosecution has examined in all ten witnesses to bring home the guilt of the accused. After considering the evidence on record and hearing both sides, the learned Sessions Judge, Beed convicted the accused by holding that accused has committed murder of his wife. Hence this Appeal.

4. Heard learned Advocate Shri Jadhav, appointed through Legal Aid to represent the appellant and learned APP Shri Salgare for the State – respondent. Perused the record and proceedings.

5. It has been vehemently submitted on behalf of the appellant that perusal of the record would show that many of the prosecution witnesses have actually not supported the prosecution story and the conviction appears to be based only on the dying declaration. PW-1 Sachin is the cousin brother of the deceased who had met her in Civil Hospital, but he has not stated that Sunita had told him as to how she received the burn injuries. PW-2 Dinkar is the father of the deceased. He has deposed that after he received the message on telephone, he had gone to Civil Hospital, Ahmednagar and saw his daughter. His daughter was completely burnt and was not able to speak with him. Therefore, oral dying declaration was not even given to the father. Same is the case with PW-3 Alka, who is the sister of the deceased. In her examination-in-chief itself she has stated that she has not ask