JUDGMENT :

(Nalin Kumar Srivastava, J.)

1. This criminal appeal is directed against the judgement and order dated 25.2.2014 and sentence dated 27.2.2014 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.6, Deoria in Sessions Trial No. 246 of 2010 arising out of Case Crime No. 221 of 2010 under Section 302 I.P.C., P.S.-Bhatparani, District-Deoria convicting and sentencing the appellant under Section 302 I.P.C. to undergo life imprisonment with a fine of Rs.20,000/-and in default of payment of fine further one year simple imprisonment.

2. The prosecution story as emerged out from the FIR is that Chandni, the sister of the informant was married with Rajan Gupta on 12.12.2006 but the husband was not satisfied with the dowry given in the marriage and always used to quarrel over that. On 8.6.2010, the informant came to know that the in-laws of the deceased had set ablaze his sister. On the next day when the informant went to the District Hospital, Deoria, he found his sister in a bitterly burnt condition and she told that her mother-in-law, Guddi Devi (Chacheri), father-in-law Shriprakash Gupta caught hold her and her mother-in-law Guddi Devi, sister-in-law Km. Rani and husband Rajan Gupta set her ablaze. The deceased (then injured) referred to the Medical College, Gorakhpur and during treatment she died on 12.6.2010. Subsequently FIR, Ex.Ka-3 was lodged on the written report Ex.Ka-1 on 16.6.2010 and G.D. Ex.Ka-4 was also prepared. The inquest of the deceased was performed and autopsy report was also prepared by Dr. Arvind Kumar Gupta, who found injuries as whole on the body of the deceased.

(i) Septic burn all over body except some part of abdomen and scalp. Superficial to deep first layer present at some place.

3. In the injury report the doctor also opined that the death was caused due to septic shock as a result of anti mortem burning. After completion of investigation charge sheet Ex.Ka-16 was submitted by the I.O against the Guddi Devi and Shriprakash Gupta, mother-in-law and father-in-law respectively of the deceased. The I.O. Inspected the spot and prepared site plan Ex.Ka-13, Inspection memo Ex.Ka-14 and submitted charge sheet Ex.Ka16 to the Court.

4. During the trial of the case accused Smt. Guddi Devi died and the case was abated against her.

5. The accused Shriprakash Gupta were charged under Section 498A, 304 B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act. He was also charged under Section 302/34 I.P.C. The accused denied of the charges and claimed to be tried.

6. The prosecution in order to prove its case in oral evidence has relied upon the testimonies of P.W.1 Santosh Kumar Gupta, the informant/ brother of the deceased, P.W.2 Urmila Devi, mother of the deceased, P.W.3 Cons. Kalicharan Yadav, the witness of the inquest, P.W.4 Head Moharir Veer Bahadur Yadav scribe of the FIR, P.W.5 S.I. Amarjeet Singh Yadav, witness of the inquest, P.W.6 Gulab Singh, retired Nayab Tehsildar, witness of the dying declaration and P.W.7 Dr. Arvind Kumar Gupta, who performed autopsy of the deceased.

7. The prosecution also relied upon documentary evidence and written report Ex.Ka-1, panchayatnama Ex.Ka-2, Chick FIR Ex.Ka-3, Kayami Rapat Ex.Ka-4, papers prepared for the purpose of autopsy as Ex.Ka-5, Ex.Ka-6, Ex.Ka-7, Ex.Ka-8, Ex.Ka-9, Ex.Ka-10, photo nash Ex.Ka-11, dying declaration Ex.Ka-12, site plan Ex.Ka-13, inspection memo Ex.Ka-14, arresting memo Ex.Ka-15 and charge sheet Ex.Ka-16.

8. It is pertinent to mention here that the genuineness of the site plan and charge sheet has been admitted by the defence side, hence the I.O. was not examined during the trial. In his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the accused stated that he has been falsely implicated. The dying declaration is a forged document and the total incident is false. It has also been stated that at the time of the incident, the husband of the deceased Rajan Gupta had gone to the