The evidentiary value of dying declaration and the admissibility without corroboration, as well as the significance of absence of motive and the accused's absconding as link evidence in establishing guilt.

K.C. Sharma, J.-This Criminal Appeal under Section 374, CrPC arises out of the Judgment and order dated 01.06.2000 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Kota, thereby convicting accused appellant Paras for offence under Sections 302 and 452, IPC and sentencing him to undergo life imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default thereof , to further undergo 2 years rigorous imprisonment on the first count and to undergo 3 years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default thereof , to further undergo 3 months rigorous imprisonment on the second count. The sentences were ordered to run consecutively.

2. According to the prosecution case, on 15.04.1998 at about 8.00 p.m., appellant reached the house of deceased Gita Bai. PW. 1 Monu, her son aged about 8-9 years was sleeping on the cot. The appellant caught hold of her and took her to Chappar, where he poured kerosene and set her on fire. Her cries attracted the attention of PW. 5 Bhura, PW. 7 Ramnath, PW. 10 Mansha Ram and other residents of the village, who extinguished the fire and immediately took Gita Bai to the police station, where she lodged an oral report, Exhibit. P-6.

3. On the next day i.e., on 16.04.1998, PW. 6 Virendra Singh, Judicial Magistrate No. 3, Kota recorded the dying declaration (Exhibit. P-3) of deceased in MBS Hospital Kota, wherein she deposed that on 15.04.1998 at 8.00 p.m. while she was at home and her son was sleeping, her neighbour Paras Ram broke open the back door, entered in the house and caught hold of her. When she cried, the accused picked up the kerosene cane lying nearby and forcibly took her to the Chapper, Chapper, where he poured kerosene on her and set fire and then he escaped from the back door.

4. The police registered a case for offence under Sections 324, 457, 436 and 307, IPC and proceeded with the investigation. On 11.05.1998, deceased Gita Bai succumbed to the burn injuries and accordingly the investigating agency added Section 302, IPC.

5. Having completed investigation, the police submitted a charge-sheet against the appellant. The learned trial Court, on the basis of evidence and material collected during investigation and placed before it, framed charges against the accused appellant and for offence under Sections 302, 436 and 457, IPC.

6. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined as many as 17 witnesses and got exhibited some documents. After the prosecution evidence was over, the accused was examined under Section 313, CrPC. The accused did not examine any witness in his defence.

7. At the conclusion of trial, the learned Sessions Judge, vide his Judgment under appeal, found the appellant guilty of having committing house trespass and for causing death of deceased and accordingly convicted and sentenced him in the manner stated hereinabove. Hence, this appeal against conviction.

8. We have heard learned Counsel for the accused appellant and the learned Public Prosecutor and have gone through the impugned Judgment , evidence and material on record.

9. In assailing the conviction of accused appellant, the first argument advanced by Mrs. Kamla Jain, learned Counsel for the appellant was that the dying declaration of the deceased cannot be taken to be a legal document, inasmuch as the doctor who certified the fitness of state of mind to make declaration of the victim has not been examined. In such circumstances, the dying declaration, Exhibit. P-3 cannot be made basis of conviction. In support of his argument, learned Counsel has placed reliance on Smt. Chhawari vs. State of Rajasthan, 1996 CrLR 16 (Raj), Laxmi vs. Om Prakash, AIR 2001 SC 2383 and Raja Ram vs. State of Rajasthan, 2000 CrLR 153 (SC).

10. We have given our anxious consideration to the above argument and have gone through the case laws cited at the bar. PW. 6 Virendra Singh Mahlawat, Judicial Magistrate who recorded the dying declaration of the deceased has deposed that before recording the statement of victim he obtained certif