BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J

1. The present appeal on behalf of the appellants Geeta and Dropti, who are daughter and mother respectively, is directed against the judgment dated 14.09.1993 delivered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi whereby the appellant Dropti has been found guilty of having committed the offence of murder of her son-in-law Madan Lal, punishable under Section 302 IPC and appellant Geeta was found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 109 IPC for having assisted her mother, appellant Dropti and another Ghanshyam (who has been declared to be a proclaimed offender), in the said murder of her husband Madan Lal. They were both convicted primarily on the basis of Exhibit PW10/A which was accepted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge as the true and correct dying declaration made by the deceased Madan Lal. By a separate order dated 27.09.1993 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi, the appellants were sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs 5,000/- each and, in default thereof, they were required to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three months each. The appellants are aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order on sentence and have preferred this appeal.

2. At the outset, it may be pointed out that initially there were three accused, namely, Geeta (wife of the deceased Madan Lal), Smt. Dropti (mother-in-law of the deceased) and one Ghanshyam, who is said to have arranged the marriage between Geeta and Madan Lal and also to have participated in the murder of Madan Lal on 28.12.1987 at about 10:30 am at Durga Temple, C-Block, Vikas Puri, Delhi. However, the impugned judgment and order on sentence relates only to the appellants Geeta and Dropti inasmuch as Ghanshyam had gone missing after having been granted bail during the trial and consequently, he had been declared to be a proclaimed offender.

3. The police machinery was brought into action on receipt of DD No. 9-A (Exhibit PW 3/A) recorded at Police Station Vikas Puri on 28.12.1987 at about 11:53 am. A copy of the said DD No. 9-A (Exhibit PW3/A) was handed over to Sub-Inspector Raj Singh, who, along with Constable Surinder, reached Durga Temple, Vikas Puri where they came across Constable Daya Nand, who told them that the injured Madan Lal, son of Lal Chand and resident of the said Durga Mandir had been taken to Deen Dayal Upadhaya Hospital (DDU Hospital). Sub-Inspector Raj Singh left Constable Surinder to guard the scene of occurrence and proceeded to the said hospital. There, he obtained the MLC No. E-18096 (Exhibit PW13/A) in respect of the injured Madan Lal. The endorsement made at 12:45pm in the MLC indicates that Madan Lal was unfit to give his statement at that point of time. However, the doctor on duty handed over Exhibit PW10/A, which purported to be a statement given by Madan Lal and which had allegedly been attested by Dr Ravi Mahajan and Dr Ashwani Gupta. The said statement had allegedly been recorded by Constable Satbir Singh immediately after the injured Madan Lal had been admitted to the said hospital. The said statement is as under:-

The transliterated portion of Mark A to A of the purported dying declaration Exhibit PW10/A reads as under:-

“Mai Pata Bala Par Rehta Hoo Aur Aaj Dinank 28.12.87 Ke Subah, 10 ½ Baje Karib Aaj Meri Saas Ne Mere Ko Tel Chhirak Kar Aag Laga Di. Meri Saas Ke Saath Ghanshyam Koshi Wala Tha Jis Ne Mere Ko Pakar Liya Aur Meri Saas Jiska Naam Dropti Hai, Usne Mere Mein Aag Laga Di. Yeh Ghanshyam Meri Shaadi Ka Bichola Hai. Meri Shaadi Dinank 13.11.86 Ko Shastri Nagar Dilli Me Hooi Thi. Aur Meri Patni Ka Naam Gita Rani Hai. Meri Patni Ne Bhi Mere Ko Jalane Me Madad Ki Hai. Aur Kahane Lagi Ki Aapke Marne Ke Baad Mai Raand (Vidhwa) Ho Kar Koi Nokri Kar Loongi. Aur Mere Mata Pita Ka Koi Dosh Nahi Hai. Yeh Ghansham Keshi Kala Bus Stand Ke Pichhe Thane Ke Paas U.P. Me Rehta Hai.”

The English translation of the