The trustworthiness of dying declarations, the need for corroboration, and the importance of unbiased witness testimony and forensic evidence.

AMAR BIR SINGH GILL, J.

1. Mamta appellant, aged 24 years, has in this appeal challenged judgment dated 8-1-1999 passed by Sessions Judge, Faridabad, convicting her of offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing her to life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000.00; in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months, for having committed the murder of her sister-in-law (Jethani) Aradhana by sprinkling kerosene oil and putting her on fire on 15-5-1997 who died as a result of burn injuries on 19-5-1997 in Safdarjang Hospital, Delhi.

2. The appellant was prosecuted in the trial Court on the allegations that PW5 Diwan Chand married her daughter Aradhana with Gulshan in the year 1990. She along with her parents-in-law, Dalip Bhatia, younger brother of her husband (Dever), and Mamta appellant, wife of Dalip (Devrani), was residing together in the same house. Mamta and her husband were not pulling on well with the deceased for the last one or two years earlier to the occurrence and the appellant used to harass Aradhana and her husband taunted levelling allegations of bad character against Aradhana. On 13-5-1997, Diwan Chand, her father, along with Harish and Dinesh Kumar PWs come to the house of his daughter in whose presence the appellant taunted Aradhana alleging that the deceased was of bad character and would not be allowed to stay in the house. Diwan Chand PW tried to pacify and persuade Mamta appellant to live peacefully along with Aradhana but the appellant proclaimed that she would not allow Aradhana to live in the house at any cost. On 15-5-1997, when Aradhana was working in the kitchen, her husband Gulshan along with children was in the bed room. Appellant Mamta sprinkled kerosene oil on Aradhana while in the kitchen and also set her on fire, whereafter her husband Gulshan brought her to Escort Hospital, Faridabad, but she was referred for further treatment to Safdarjang Hospital, Delhi. On receipt of intimation Exhibit PI from Escort Hospital, PW8 Assistant Sub Inspector Ranbir Singh, who was Incharge of Police Post Debua Colony, Police Station NIT, Faridabad, came to Escort Hospital and moved application Exhibit PJ to know the fitness of the injured to make statement but, as per endorsement Exhibit PJ/1, the doctor informed that she was already sent to Safdarjang Hospital, Delhi. He then came to Safdarjang Hospital, Delhi, and moved application Exhibit PK and she was declared fit to make statement vide opinion Exhibit PK/1. PW3 Assistant Sub Inspector Ramesh Chand contacted PW2 Sh. R. N. Sharma, Sub Divisional Magistrate, for the purpose of recording dying declaration. Sh. R. N. Sharma PW then came to Safdarjang Hospital and enquired from the doctor as to the fitness of the injured to make statement and on having satisfied that she was in fit state of mind to make statement, he recorded statement Exhibit PA of Aradhana which he read over to her and she thumb-marked the same in acceptance thereof as correct. Sh. R. N. Sharma PW then made endorsement Exhibit PA/1 on the statement of Aradhana and handed over the same to Assistant Sub-Inspector Ranbir Singh who forwarded the statement Exhibit PA with endorsement of Sh. R. N. Sharma, Sub Divisional Magistrate, to the police station on the basis of which a case under Section 307 read with Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code was registered vide First Information Report Exhibit PA/3 against the appellant and her husband Dalip. PW8 Assistant Sub Inspector Ranbir Singh then came to the place of occurrence and in the presence of Harish Kumar he prepared rough site plan Exhibit PK of the occurrence and also got the same photographed besides taking into possession broken bangles, half burnt clothes of Aradhana in a sealed parcel and also the empty bottle smelling kerosene oil vide memo Exhibit PL. The appellant was arrested on 18-5-1997, Aradhana died on 19-5-1997 in the hospital whereafter the offence against the appell