Prasanta Kumar Saikia, J.

1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 17.07.2013, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Bongaigaon in Sessions Case No. 80 (J)2011 convicting one Md. Jahidul Islam of offence U/s. 302 IPC and sentencing him to imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default, R.I. for one year. Md. Jahidul Islam would be referred to hereinafter as the accused person for convenient of discussions. Heard Mr. HRA Choudhury, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. N. Uddin, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. K.A. Mazumdar, learned Addl. P.P. Assam, appearing for the State respondent.

2. The projected case of the prosecution, in short, is that on 30.11.2007 at about 7 PM, one Madan Malo lodged an FIR with the Officer-in-charge, Jogighopa Police Station stating inter alia that his mother had developed some unhealthy relationship with the accused person over a considerable period of time. On 29.11.2007 at about 7 PM, the accused person took his mother in his motor cycle to the house of his aunt (informant), situated at Pachania village.

3. On the date aforesaid, none was there in the house of her aunt at Pachania village and as such, mother of the informant and the accused had spent said night in the house of his aunt at Pachania village. It has been alleged that later they came to know that his mother was set on fire by the accused person. Being so informed, he rushed to hospital and found his mother being bum fatally.

4. According to him, almost of the body parts of his mother were burnt. His mother was shifted to Abhayapuri Civil Hospital where from she was shifted to Goalpara Civil Hospital for better treatment. However, she succumbed to the injuries at Goalpara Civil Hospital on 30.11.2007. On receipt of the FIR, police registered a case vide Jogighopa Police Station Case No. 120(B), 302 IPC and ordered one Md. Muslim Ali, S.I. of Police, to investigate the case.

5. Being so entrusted with the investigation, Muslim Ali conducted the investigation, held inquest on the dead body, sent the same to the hospital for post mortem examination, examined the witnesses and did other needful. However, before he could complete the investigation, he was transferred out of Jogighopa Police Station and as such, he handed over the case diary to the Officer-in-charge, Jogighopa Police Station.

6. Thereafter, one Atul Roy, S.I. of Police submitted charge sheet U/s. 120(B)/302 IPC against the accused person and forwarded the accused to the court to stand his trial. When the charge sheet was so laid before the C.J.M., Bongaigaon, he committed the case to the court of Sessions, Bongaigaon since the offence U/s. 120(B)/302 IPC is exclusively triable by the court of Sessions.

7. On commitment of the case and on hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the learned Sessions Judge, Bongaigaon framed charge U/s. 302IPC against the accused person and the charge, so framed, on being read over and explained to him, the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. During trial, prosecution had examined as many as 12 witnesses including the informant, Medical Officer and I.O.

8. The statement of the accused person was also recorded U/s. 313 CrPC. The accused plea was of total denial. He, however, did not adduce any evidence of his own. On conclusion of trial, and on hearing the argument, advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, the learned court below found the accused guilty U/s. 302 IPC, convicting him there-under and sentenced to punishment as aforesaid. It is that judgment which has been assailed in the present appeal citing several infirmities therein.

9. Mr. HRA Choudhury, learned Senior counsel submits that the judgment, under challenge, is not unsustainable since it suffers from several infirmities of extremely serious in nature. In that connection, it has been contended that prosecution case is basically based on three dying declarations, reportedly made to PW1, PW4 and PW