The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of scrutinizing dying declarations and the burden on the accused to prove the plea of alibi with absolute certainty.

JUDGMENT :

SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J.

1. The present appeal has been filed under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, (hereinafter referred as 'Cr.P.C.'), against the judgment dated 26.09.2003 and order on sentence dated 27.09.2003 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi in Session Case No. 105/2001 in FIR No. 442/2001 registered under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred as 'IPC') at Police Station Nangloi, whereby the appellant was convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and further sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and in default of payment of fine to undergo further simple imprisonment for a period of two months.

2. Brief facts of the case, as noticed by the learned trial court, are as under: -

"1. The accused is facing a charge under Section 302 IPC. It is alleged by the prosecution that on the night intervening 2nd and 3rd June, 2001, the accused had poured kerosene oil on the person of his wife Suman and had set her on fire at their house.

The local police was informed about the incident at about 1.30 a.m. on 03.06.2001 by duty constable Om Prakash at Safdarjung Hospital. He had told the police station, Nangloi that Suman, w/o Jai Shankar, R/o Khasra No.5, Kamruddin Nagar, village Nangloi had been got admitted in a burnt condition by her husband. DD No. 30-A was recorded on this information at P.S. Nangloi and was entrusted to SI Ghanshyam. SI Ghanshyam had visited Safdarjung hospital along with const. Akhilesh and had obtained the MLC of Suman.

The injured had been declared fit for statement. SI Ghanshyam, therefore, informed the SDM as the marriage of the injured had taken place within seven years of the incident. The SDM arrived in the hospital at about 3/4 a.m. He recorded the statement of the injured and gave directions for registration of a case against her husband.

In her statement to the SDM, Suman had stated that while she was present at her house her husband had poured kerosene oil on her person and had set her on fire. She had also stated that her husband suspected her fidelity and further suspected that she had illicit relations with her nephews Raj Kumar and Manoj. On the direction of the SDM, the present case FIR No. 224/01 was registered at P.S. Nangloi U/s 307 IPC. The husband of the injured was arrested by the police.

2. Suman (deceased) had expired in the hospital on 5.6.01 at about 10 p.m. The inquest proceeding was conducted by the SDM who sent the deadbody for postmortem. After a post-mortem had been conducted, the deadbody was handed over to the relations of the deceased. "

3. After completion of investigation, a charge sheet was filed and charge for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC was framed against the appellant/accused, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

4. To bring home the guilt of the appellant/accused the prosecution has examined 14 witnesses in all. Statement of the appellant/accused was recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C wherein he claimed innocence and stated that he has been falsely implicated in the present case. The appellant/accused lead one witness in his defence.

5. After hearing counsel for both the sides and on appreciation of entire evidence available on record, the learned Trial Court convicted the appellant for the charged offence.

6. Mr. Sulaiman Mohd. Khan, learned counsel for the appellant, opened his submissions by contending that the impugned judgment dated 26.09.2003 is based on conjectures and surmises and the same is against the facts and settled proposition of law and that the learned trial court has ignored and omitted the material evidence and has disregarded the cogent evidence in favour of the appellant.

7. Mr. Khan, further contended that the circumstances which have been relied upon by the learned Session Judge are not su