1. - The accused appellant has preferred this appeal under Section 374(2) Cr.P.c. challenging the judgment dated 05.04.2002 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.1, Bundi, whereby he has been convicted for the offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default, to further undergo two months rigorous imprisonment.

2. The prosecution case was initiated on a Parcha Bayan (Ex.P-11) of Kumari Maya recorded on 22.03.1997 at Government Hospital, Lakheri by Kailash Chand Sharma, SHO (PW-17). It was on the basis of the said Parcha Bayan that a First Information Report (65/1997) was registered by Hafeez Mohammed, ASI (PW-14) at Police Station, Lakheri, District Bundi for the offences under Sections 307, 452 and 509 IPC.In the said Parcha Bayan, it was stated by Kumari Maya that on 22.03.1997, at about 10 O'Clock, she was alone at her residence. Her father had gone to the shop and mother had taken the goats out for grazing. At that time, the accused Rafeeq Mohammed came and after having caught hold of her, wanted to have sexual intercourse forcefully. When she resisted the accused, he pored kerosene lying in a cane nearby and lit fire by taking out a matchbox from his pocket. Thereafter, when she raised hue and cry, the neighbourers assembled, which included mother of Dada Altaf, Razia and her brother Mangi Lal, etc. The brother of the deceased had then pored water on her clothes. As a result of the fire, face, hands, legs, etc of the deceased got burnt. Further, it is stated in the Parcha Bayan that earlier when Kumari Maya was cleaning the place by a broom, some pieces of garbage had gone on the Chabutara of Asanad. It was on that count that dispute arose. Later on, her brother carried her to the hospital.

3. After registration of the report on the aforesaid Parcha Bayan, investigation commenced and the police prepared the Naksha Mauka (Ex.P-8), seized the kerosene cane (Ex.P-9), collected the injury report (Ex.P-3), the dying declaration of the deceased Kumari Maya was recorded by the Judicial Magistrate, Lakheri (Ex.P-15), etc. Subsequently, Kumari Maya was referred to M.B.S. Hospital, Kota, where she expired on 07.04.1997. Consequently, postmortem report was got conducted and report (Ex.P-7) was obtained. The corpus was handed over to Ramnarayan, the father of the deceased. The accused person was then arrested (Ex.P-13).On conclusion of the investigation, police filed challan against the accused appellant for the offences under Section 452, 306 and 509 IPC, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Lakheri. The case was then committed to the Court of Sessions which was transferred to the learned trial court. The trial commenced before the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.1, Bundi by framing of charge for the offence under Section 302 IPC and in the alternative under Section 306 IPC. The accused appellant denied the charges and claimed for trial. The prosecution, in support of its case, had produced 17 witnesses and had got 15 documents exhibited which were collected during the course of investigation. Thereafter, the statements of the accused appellant were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. The learned trial court concluded the trial by passing the judgment impugned, on 05.04.2002. Hence, the present appeal before this Court.

4. The learned counsel for the accused appellant has submitted that the learned trial court has committed error in passing the impugned judgment as the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Further, he has submitted that as per the evidence on record, including the Parcha Bayan and dying declaration, the deceased had not been burnt to death but she had committed suicide. It has also been submitted that the dying declaration was neither recorded in accordance with law nor it inspires confidence. In fact, according to the counsel for the appellant, the deceased was