A dying declaration is admissible in evidence only if it is proved in accordance with law and is above suspicion. Corroboration is necessary to support a dying declaration when there are discrepancies or doubts regarding its recording.

S.C. Pandey, J.

1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 23.7.1994 passed by the IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur in Sessions Trial No. 239/91, whereby the appellant has been convicted for offence punishable under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to R.I. for five years and fine of Rs. 1,000/- (Rupees one thousand) or in default R.I. for five months.

2. The case of the prosecution was that the appellant Malikram was living in the house of Dhaniram at Sarkanda, District Bilaspur alongwith his second wife Rama. The first wife of the appellant was Shashi Gayakwad. The appellant performed marriage ceremony with Rama Gayakwad at Maiher Temple on his assertion that he was unmarried. Thereafter, at Maiher Temple, the appellant brought the deceased Rama Gayakwad and kept her in the house of Dhaniram. His first wife was living at the locality Tarbahar of Bilaspur. It was the case of the prosecution that the dispute between the appellant and Rama Gayakwad was not on account of the fact that he was already married but because he did not supply her adequate money.

3. On the date of incident i.e. 20.7.1989, it was alleged by the prosecution that there was an altercation between the appellant and his second wife Rama Gayakwad, for the reason, the appellant was not paying her rent of the house in which she was living at Sarkanda, Distt. Bilaspur. On demand of the rent, the appellant abused her and stated that he could have number of wives like her and also stated that she would not be able to know about them. Thereupon at about 5.00 p.m., Rama Gayakwad committed suicide by pouring kerosene on her body and setting it to fire. She was admitted in the hospital on the same date and she died in the hospital after three or four hours of admission. It was also not disputed by the prosecution that accused / appellant was also found to have been trying to prevent the fire and he was also admitted in the hospital. This fact was also recorded by Mr. K.B, Singh, Asstt. Sub-Inspector, PW 7 and his report was exhibited as Ex. P:7; This report was recorded by Mr. K.B. Singh on 20.7.1979 at about 8 p.m. This was registered as Crime No. Zero and it is the real F.I.R. Dr. Sunita Verma, PW 9 examined the deceased Rama Gayakwad on 20.7.1989 at about 9 p.m. Her medical report is Ex. P-6(A). In this report Ex. P-6(A), it had been recorded by Dr. Sunita Verma, PW 9 that at the Rama Gayakwad was admitted, her pulse could not be recorded and also that her blood pressure could not be recorded, as this was the case of hundred percent bums.

4. Subsequently, Rama Gayakwad died at about 12.10 a.m. on 21.7.1989. Thereafter, death intimation report/inquest report was recorded. The Investigating Officer recorded Ex. P-10 against the appellant on the basis of a dying declaration, Ex. P-18 recorded by the Tahsildar Shri R.R. Thakur, PW-11. Thereafter, completing the investigation in usual manner, a challan against the appellant was filed in the Court of C.J.M., Bilaspur who committed the case to Sessions trial. The Sessions Court charged the appellant with abetting the suicide of Rama Gayakwad and thereby committing an offence under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code.

5. The appellant denied his guilt and stated that he has been falsely implicated.

6. The Trial Court convicted the appellant under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code mainly on the basis of dying declaration. Ex. P-18 recorded by the Tahsildar Shri R.R. Thakur, PW-11. There was no eye witness to the incident except the appellant who himself recorded the bum injuries in trying to extinguish the fire.

7. In this appeal, learned Counsel for the appellant argued that commission of offence under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code was not made out, for the reason, the dying declaration Ex. P-18 recorded by Mr. R.R. Thakur, Tahsildar, PW-11 was not proved in accordance with law and his document is not above suspicion. Learned Counsel for th