The prosecution's case must be established beyond reasonable doubt, especially when relying on dying declarations, which must be corroborated and trustworthy.

ORDER :

Devnarayan Mishra, J.

This appeal has been preferred being aggrieved with the judgment dated 04.04.1997 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (NDPS Act), Jabalpur in Sessions Trial No.615/1995 by which the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 302 of the IPC and sentenced to R.I. for life imprisonment with default stipulations.

2. In nutshell the prosecution case before the trial Court was that on 17.03.1995 at about 12:15 PM deceased Dheeraj Singh purchased Samosa from the shop of Ashok Nema and sitting in the school ground of Belkheda was having Samosa. Appellant Om Prakash @ Lallu reached there and demanded Samona on which the deceased Dheeraj Singh denied. Appellant Om Prakash @ Lallu started abusing the deceased and when the deceased Dheeraj Singh objected, appellant Om Prakash @ Lallu started assaulting the deceased by knife and inflicted the injury on his chest. On that the deceased Dheeraj Singh ran away from the spot, appellant Om Prakash @ Lallu followed him and assaulted and caused multiple injuries, deceased fell down on the road. When his brother and Police Authorities got the information of the incident, they reached there. The deceased was brought to the Primary Health Center, Belkheda where Police recorded the Dehatinalishi and treating doctor H.N. Badhwani (PW-11) recorded the dying declaration and deceased succumbed to injuries. Merg No.05/1995 was registered, inquest report was prepared, dead body of the deceased was sent for postmortem. Crime No.24/1995 on 17.03.1995 at 21:03 P.M. for the offence under Section 302 was registered against the appellant. Appellant Om Prakash @ Lallu was arrested and knife used in the offence was recovered. The cloths of the deceased, knife used in offence, shirt and pant of the appellant were sent for FSL examination. After usual investigation the charge-sheet was filed before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Patan and after commitment, the case was sent to Sessions Judge, Jabalpur and after transfer the case was sent for trail before the Trial Court.

3. The trial Court framed the charges for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC for which appellant pleaded that he is innocent and abjured the guilt and prayed for trial. The trial Court recorded the 17 prosecution witnesses and examined the appellant under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. Appellant has examined the 2 defence witnesses also.

4. The appellant has pleaded that he has falsely been implicated in the case.

5. Trial Court after hearing the parties passed the impugned judgment, hence, this appeal.

6. Learned counsel for appellant has submitted that the dying declaration (Ex.P-3), Dehatinalishi (Ex.P-30) and statement of deceased (Ex.P-37) are the concocted documents as the deceased died on the spot and he had not given any statement to Police Authorities or doctor. He further submitted that all these documents were prepared after the death of deceased. There is a material contradiction in the statement of Bhavsingh (PW-2) and police personals i.e. Vidhadhar Pandye (PW-15) and Balram Singh Jhariya (PW-16).

7. Dr. S.P. Singh (PW-8) has stated in para-7 of his statement that deceased suffered the grievous injuries and there was internal bleeding and due to excess bleeding, a person can become unconscious in 5-10 minutes and it is also possible that the person may die on the spot or may be in coma.

8. Learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that except t