Court emphasized that a magistrate's dying declaration carries significant weight over oral declarations, affecting conviction in murder cases.

JUDGMENT :

Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.

(1) Invoking criminal appellate jurisdiction of this Court, the sole appellant herein has preferred this criminal appeal under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C., calling in question the legality, validity and correctness of the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 24.05.2017, passed in Session Trial No.05/2017 (State of Chhattisgarh v. Sankra Yadav) by the 5^th Addl. Sessions Judge, Raigarh (CG), whereby he has been convicted for offence under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.1,000/- and, in default of payment of fine, sentenced to undergo additional rigorous imprisonment for 06 months.

(2) The case of the prosecution, in short, is that on 17.07.2016, at about 4-5 PM, in the house of the appellant, situated at Village Aamapal, which comes within the ambit of Police Station Chakradharnagar, District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh), the accused- appellant herein firstly demanded money from his wife, namely, Samrin Bai (hereinafter referred to as the “deceased”) and when she refused to give money, the appellant poured kerosene oil over her body and set her ablaze by lighting matchstick and, due to which, deceased suffered burn injuries and died later on during the course of treatment at hospital on 24.07.2016 and, thereby, said to have committed offences under Sections 304-B & 302 of IPC.

(3) It is further case of the prosecution that immediately after the incident, the deceased was escorted to Kirodimal District Hospital, Raigarh, where on the next day (i.e. 18.07.2016), after having been certified to be in fit state of mind to give dying declaration vide Ex.P/22 by Dr. S. Lakra (not examined), duly proved by Dr. R. Meshram (PW-12), Executive Magistrate, namely, Shivnandan Sahu (PW-14) recorded her dying declaration vide Ex.P/06 in presence of deceased’s sister, namely, Bund Kunwar (PW-03), wherein the deceased stated that on the date of incident, while preparing tea, she came into the contact of fire and suffered burn injuries and did not implicated her husband (accused-appellant) to be author of the crime. Thereafter, during the course of treatment in the hospital, on 24.07.2016, the deceased succumbed to the injuries and died and, pursuant to which, information was given to the police. Thereafter, merg intimation and FIR were registered and wheels of investigation started running, in which, summons under Section 175 of CrPC were sent vide Ex.P/01 and inquest proceedings were conducted vide Ex.P/02. Spot map was also prepared. The dead-body of the deceased was sent for postmortem examination, which was conducted by Dr. Prakash Kumar Chetwani (PW-08) and, as per PM report (Ex.P/12), it has been opined that cause of death is septic shock and septicemia due to infected burn wound. The appellant- accused was arrested vide Ex.P/33. After statements of witnesses were recorded and due investigation, the police filed charge-sheet against the appellants and other acquitted accused persons in the competent criminal court having jurisdiction and, thereafter, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions for hearing and trial in accordance with law, in which the appellant/accused abjured his guilt and entered into defence by statin