P.D. KUDAL, J.—This appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Shriganganagar, dated December 9. 1978, whereby the accused-appellant has been convicted under sec. 302, I.P.C.,and sentenced to imprisonment for life. 2. The brief facts of the case which are relevant for the disposal of this appeal are that the accused - appellant was married to Smt. Lachmi about A\ years back from the date of the incident. The prosecution case is that though the parents of Smt. Lachmi had given dowry according to their means, but the dowry fell short of the expectations of the accused and his parents. It was contended that the inadequate dowry brought strained relations between Smt. Lachmi, her husband and her in-laws. The prosecution case is that after a year and half of the marriage of Smt. Lachmi, the accused and his parents demanded Rs. 6,000/- from Malaram, the father of Smt. Lachmi. Malaram could arrange Rs. 2,500/- only. The part payment could not bring rapport between Smt. Lachmi, her father-in-law, mother-in-law and her husband. She was ultimately turned out from her in-laws house. She went thereafter, to live with her parents. Thereafter, a Biradari Panchayat was assembled and the father-in-law and the mother-in-law of Smt. Lachmi were persuaded to keep Smt. Lachmi with them and to give a good treatment to her. At the Biradari Panchayat it was settled that Smt. Lachmi would go to her fathers house, live there for about 10 days and would, thereafter, be brought to her husbands house at Narsingh Pura. In pursuance of this understanding Smt. Lachmi went to her fathers house at Padampur. 3. Om Prakash, the younger brother of the accused who was husband of Smt. Lachmi went to Narsingh Pura to fetch Smt. Lachmi. It is said, Smt. Lachmi asked her parents to give her the rest of the dowry amount which her in-laws were demanding, but as her parents could not arrange for the money, Smt. Lachmi went weeping with Om Prakash in the morning of April 25, 1978. The ladies who were neighbours to her fathers house, namely, Smt. Chirya, P.W. 4 and Smt. Santosh Bai, P.W. 5 bade farewell to her The accused appellant felt annoyed with Smt. Lachmi and while she was sitting in the Kotha of the house, he asked her to go away. Smt. Lachmi did not go out of the house. The ladies who were neighbours to her fathers house, namely, Smt. Chirya, P.W. 4 and Smt. Santosh Bai, P.W. 5 bade farewell to her The accused appellant felt annoyed with Smt. Lachmi and while she was sitting in the Kotha of the house, he asked her to go away. Smt. Lachmi did not go out of the house. The accused, it is alleged, lost patience and poured kerosene oil on her clothings and lighted a match stick and set her clothes to fire. It is contended that at that time the parents of the accused were sitting at out-door. Smt. Lachmi raised an alarm which attracted them as also others. It is said, thereafter, Smt. Lachmi was moved to the hospital. She was admitted in the hospital at 2.40 P.M. on April 25, 1978. The Medical Jurist, Dr. Rajendra Kumar Gupta, attended her and finding her condition serious, he informed the local police for getting her dying declaration recorded. Dr. Gupta noticed that about 80 per cent of her body was covered with IInd degree burns with blister formation. Her clothes were burnt and were giving smell of kerosene oil. The brassary which she was putting on, was not, however, affected by the fire. Smt. Lachmis condition was poor and the burns and blood pressure were not recordable, but she was conscious. The Medical Jurist further stated that during her examination the patient told him that her husband had poured kerosene oil on her clothings. Dr. Gupta prepared Ex. P. 2 and also seized her burnt clothes. During the seizure of clothes a 10 rupee note was also found: but it was also half burnt. Dr. Gupta forwarded all the clothes in a sealed packet to the police authorities along with his letter Ex. P. 3. 4. On receipt of Dr. Guptas letter, Ex. P.l, at the police station, Kotwali, Shri Ganganagar, the Assistant Sub-Inspector, Iqbal Singh, reached at the hospital and recorded the statement of Smt. Lachmi, Ex. P. 7 In this connection, she had told that the accused had poured kerosene oil on her clothings. The Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Ganganagar, reached the hospital for recording the dying declaration of Smt. Lachmi. Shri R.K. Songara, the Judicial Magistrate No.l, Ganganagar, after reaching the hospital, satisfied himself with the condition and the ability of the lady for giving her statement. Dr. The Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Ganganagar, reached the hospital for recording the dying declaration of Smt. Lachmi. Shri R.K. Songara, the Judicial Magistrate No.l, Ganganagar, after reaching the hospital, satisfied himself with the condition and the ability of the lady for giving her statement. Dr. P.K. Agrawal, who was on duty at that time, certified the fitness of the patient vide his certificate, Ex. P.6. The statement of Smt. Lachmi was recorded at 4.40 P.M. on April 25, 1978. The AS.I., Shri Iqbal Singh, returned to the Police Station after doing the needful. He presented the necessary papers to the Station House Officer, who forwarded them to the concerned police station and a case under section 307, I.P.C, was registered against the accused-appellant Thereafter, Shri Surender Kumar, S.H.O. started investigation on April 27, 1978. On that day, he went to village Narsingh Pura and inspected the scene of occurrence Inside the Kotha he found a tin of kerosene oil containing about a half bottle of kerosene oil in it. A broken earthen pot, a half burnt quilt, certain piece of brass bangles and broken match box with scattered sticks and a can l/4th full of water were also found on the spot. The S.H.O. seized them vide Ex. P. 14. 2, 3 and 6" wide ground was also noticed as having been duel. The S.H.O. prepared the site map, Ex.P. 13, and mentioned relevant necessary details in Ex. P. 13 A. 5. Smt. Lachmi succumbed to her injuries on April 28, 1978, at about 11.45 A.M. Dr. Gupta was of the opinion that she had died due to shock caused by extensive burns to her. In the opinion of Dr. Gupta the injuries of burns sustained by the deceased were sufficient to cause her death in the ordinary course of nature. On the information of the death of the deceased the charge was altered to one under section 302, I.P.C. and P.W. 3, Shri Shiv Narain/A.S.I, was deputed to go to the hospital, where he prepared Ex. P.8, the panchnama and the Surate-hal-Nash, Ex P. 9. After the post mortem examination of the deceased, he delivered the dead body of the deceased to her father, Mala Ram, vide receipt Ex. P. 10. 6. The accused was arrested on May 3, 1978 and after investigation, he was charge-sheeted before the Court of the Munsiff-cum-Judicial Magistrate at Karanpur. P.8, the panchnama and the Surate-hal-Nash, Ex P. 9. After the post mortem examination of the deceased, he delivered the dead body of the deceased to her father, Mala Ram, vide receipt Ex. P. 10. 6. The accused was arrested on May 3, 1978 and after investigation, he was charge-sheeted before the Court of the Munsiff-cum-Judicial Magistrate at Karanpur. The learned Magistrate committed the case to the court of Sessions at Ganganagar, from where, it was transferred to the court of the Additional District & Sessions Judge, Ganganagar, who decided this case. 7. In order to prove the guilt the prosecution has examined 12 witnesses and have got 15 documents exhibited at the trial. 8. The accused has pleaded not guilty to the charge and has pleaded alibi in support of his plea. He has examined six defence witnesses. 9. The defence of the accused is that Smt. Lachmi was a frustrated wife of the accused and used to desert her husband for no rhyme or reason. It was further contended that there have never been any dispute regarding the dowry as alleged by the prosecution. As regards the incident on April 25, 1978, it was contended that the deceased had returned from her fathers house and after her arrival at her in-laws house she herself poured kerosene oil on her clothes in an effort to commit suicide with a view to falsely implicate her innocent husband and her in-laws. It was further contended that at the time of the incident, the accused alongwith his brother, was working in his Khala and was not at all present at the house. It was further suggested that during the course of investigation, the Additional Superintendent of Police, Shri Ganganagar, had visited the village and had collected the villagers and had enquired of them about the cause of the death of the deceased. At that time, D.W. 1, Deda Ram and D.W. 3 Om Prakash, had taken special oath and had entered the village temple with their children in their lape and had stated that they were confident that the accused had not committed the ghastly crime. At that time, D.W. 1, Deda Ram and D.W. 3 Om Prakash, had taken special oath and had entered the village temple with their children in their lape and had stated that they were confident that the accused had not committed the ghastly crime. The defence has tried not only to prove the alibi of the accused by showing his presence in his Khala at the time of incident, but has also tried to impress and stress upon the innocence of the accused by leading some positive evidence in that behalf. 10. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, after trial, convicted the accused-appellant under section 302, IPC, and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for life. 11. On behalf of the accused-appellant it has been contended that the learned trial court erred in law in holding that the accused appellant had a motive to commit the crime. The contention of the accused-appellant is that he had absolutely no motive to commit the murder of his wife. It was further contended that the learned trial court erred in law in placing reliance on the testimonies of P.W. 6, Mst. Devi, the mother of Smt. Lachmi and P.W. 11, Mala Ram, the father of Smt. Lachmi for holding the fact that motive has been proved. It was contended that the statements of the father and the mother of Smt. Lachmi are not corroborated by any independent witness. The statement of P.W. 10, Gaja Nand, is wholly unnatural. 12. It was also contended that the learned trial Judge failed to consider that Smt. Lachmi was not willing to live in the company of her husband. She being a literate girl in the town of Padampur failed to accommodate herself in the house of her husband. She had also, prior to this incident, left the house of her husband and was found at the bus station. It was also contended that the learned trial court erred in law in convicting the accused-appellant on the basis of un-corroborated dying declaration. The dying declarations were not truthful and were made at the instance of other persons in order to falsely implicate her husband due to his disliking towards him. It was also contended that the learned trial Judge erred in law in placing reliance on the testimony of Dr. The dying declarations were not truthful and were made at the instance of other persons in order to falsely implicate her husband due to his disliking towards him. It was also contended that the learned trial Judge erred in law in placing reliance on the testimony of Dr. Gupta, PW 1, who had stated that the deceased had told him that the husband had poured kerosene oil on her clothes. It was also contended that Dr. Guptas testimony is doubtful and further more his statement has been recorded late by the police under section 161 Cr.P.C. without any reason and no explanation has been given for the delay in recording his statement. It was further contended on behalf of the accused-appellant that the learned trial Judge erred in law in placing reliance in Ex. P. 7, the dying declaration recorded by A.S.I., Iqbal Singh and Ex. P. 11, the dying declaration recorded by Shri R.K. Songara, Magistrate. It was contended on behalf of the accused-appellant that Smt. Lachmi committed suicide and when she was saved by the accused and the neighbours, she gave such a statement in order to save herself and to implicate her husband. 13. That the learned trial court failed to consider the conduct of the accused in bringing the deceased immediately after the incident to the hospital. If the accused-appellant was the culprit, then he would have not brought the deceased alive in the hospital. It was also contended that the learned trial Court failed to consider that there are serious infirmities in the dying declaration Ex. P. 7. and Ex. P. 11. in asmuch-as the place of occurrence is different. 14. The learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the complainant were heard. They have contended that the prosecution has succeeded in bringing the guilt home to the accused-appellant. They have also contended that there is no infirmity in the dying declarations, Ex.7 and Ex.P.ll; and that the learned trial court was fully justified in drawing inference of guilt against the accused-appellant on the basis of Ex. P.7 and Ex. P.ll. It was also contended that the prosecution has fully established the motive of the crime. It was also contended that there is no reason to discard the sworn testimony of the father and the mother of Smt. Lachmi. 15. P.7 and Ex. P.ll. It was also contended that the prosecution has fully established the motive of the crime. It was also contended that there is no reason to discard the sworn testimony of the father and the mother of Smt. Lachmi. 15. The respective contentions of the learned counsel for the parties and the learned Public Prosecutor have been considered and the record of the case has been carefully perused. 16. P.W.I, Dr. Rajendra Kumar Gupta, has stated that on April 25, 1978 he was posted as Medical Jurist in the Government General Hospital, Ganga-nagar. At about 3.45 P.M., on that day, he was called upon to attend a case of severe burns in the Female Surgical Ward of the hospital. He examined Smt. Lachmi, wife of Prithvi Raj, age 22 years, resident of Village Narsinghpura. He found the lady in serious condition, and, therefore, reported the matter to the police station, Kotwali Shri Ganganagar, through his letter Ex. P.l. According to this witness, Smt. Lachmi was in a fit condition to give her statement. She was conscious, her general condition was poor and her pules and B.P. were not recordable. Kerosene oil smell was present on the body and clothes. About 80% burn was present all over the body with blister formation. The burns were of second degree in nature and were, therefore, grievous. The burns injuries were caused to the lady during last 6 to 8 hours. The injury report Ex.P. 2 was written by him. The witness sealed burnt clothes of the lady and had sent the sealed packet to the S.H.O , Police Station Ghamurwali, with his letter Ex.P. 3. During the course of the examination of the injured Smt. Lachmi, the witness enquired her about the cause of her injuries to which she replied that she had been burnt by her husband. On 28th April 1978 at about 12 in the noon, he was informed by the doctor on duty that Smt. Lachmi has expired. He informed the S.H.O., Police Kotwali, Shri Ganganagar by Ex. P. 4 about the death of Smt. Lachmi. 17. He conducted the post-mortem at about 2.30 P.M. on April 28, 1978. The hair of the eye brows were signed while that of the scalp were not signed. A stitched wound on the left leg was also visible. Eyes were closed and and pupils were dialated. P. 4 about the death of Smt. Lachmi. 17. He conducted the post-mortem at about 2.30 P.M. on April 28, 1978. The hair of the eye brows were signed while that of the scalp were not signed. A stitched wound on the left leg was also visible. Eyes were closed and and pupils were dialated. In the opinion of the witness the deceased had died due to shock caused by extensive burns to her. The injuries of burns sustained by the deceased were sufficient to cause her death in the ordinary course of nature. He was not present when the Magistrate recorded the dying declaration of the deceased. The oral information given to the witness by Smt. Lachmi was that she was burnt by her husband. This fact was not recorded any where and not even in the bed head ticket. In the post mortem report Ex. P. 5, in Col. 7, relating to information the witness stated that he had mentioned "none in particular". The police had interrogated me during investigation and had recorded the statement on May 23, 1978. On being cross examined the witness stated that Smt. Lachmi was admitted at 2.45 P.M. in the Ganganagar hospital and not at 3.45 P.M. as mentioned in Ex. D. 1., on April 25, 1978. He was brought by Prithviraj, the father-in-law and two or three other persons and a lady. The witness further stated that in Ex. D. 1 at the portion marked E to F, he did not state to the police that medicines were provided by her husband. The hair of the scalp of Lachmi were not burnt nor signed. This may mean that the fire commenced from the lower portion of the body or middle portion of the body and not from the head portion of the body. 18 P. W. 2, Shri Iqbal Singh, A S.T., Police Station Sangaria, Shri Ganganagar, stated that on receipt of Ex P. 1, he went to the hospital as per the orders of the S.H.O. He recorded the statement of Mst. Lachmi. She was conscious and at that time she was in a position to give her statement. He had recorded the statement of Mst. Lachmi as she stated. Thereafter, he submitted Ex.P.8 for getting the dying declaration of Smt. Lachmi recorded by the Magistrate. Lachmi. She was conscious and at that time she was in a position to give her statement. He had recorded the statement of Mst. Lachmi as she stated. Thereafter, he submitted Ex.P.8 for getting the dying declaration of Smt. Lachmi recorded by the Magistrate. At the time when Ex.P.7 was recorded, the Medical Attendant, nurse, compounder or doctor might be present there. I did not obtain the signatures on Ex.P.7. This is absolutely incorrect that Ex.P.7 was prepared in the Kotwali and, lateron, thumb impression of Mst Lachmi was obtained. 19. P.W.3, Shiv Narain, A S.T., of Police Kotwali Shri Ganganagar, stated that on receipt of the information of the death of Smt Lachmi, he went to hospital under the instructions of the S.H.O. The dead body of Smt. Lachmi was there and the burnt clothes were on her body. He prepared the Panchnama in the presonce of the witnesses. 20. P.W.4, Smt. Chirya, stated that when Smt. Lachmi was going from her fathers place to her in-laws place she was weeping. On her being asked of the reason for weeping, she stated that her in-laws were demanding money and her father was not able to arrange for the same. The witness is a neighbour of Mala Ram, the father of Smt. Lachmi for the last 30 years. 21. P.W.5, Smt. Santosh Bai stated that she saw Smt. Lachmi weeping while going towards the bus stand. On being enquired, Smt. Lachmi stated that her in-laws demanded money and, if money is not paid, then her mother in-law and the father-in-law would rebuke her. 22. P.W.6, Debo wife of Mala Ram, stated that Smt. Lachmi was married to the accused-appellant about 4 years back but, now her in-laws are demanding Rs. 6,000/- more towards dowry. Her husband had also paid Rs. 2,500/-, but as the balance of the additional demand had not been paid, Lachmis in-laws are not treating her well. At the time when Smt. Lachmi was going to her father-in-laws place, she told her that if Rs. 3,500/- are not paid, her father-in-law and mother-in-law would beat her. When the witness went to the hospital to meet Smt. Lachmi after the burning incident had taken place, Smt. Lachmi told the witness that because of the money affair the accused-appellant poured kerosene on her and set at the fire. 23. 3,500/- are not paid, her father-in-law and mother-in-law would beat her. When the witness went to the hospital to meet Smt. Lachmi after the burning incident had taken place, Smt. Lachmi told the witness that because of the money affair the accused-appellant poured kerosene on her and set at the fire. 23. The witness further stated that Smt. Shanti is the elder daughter. She too had burnt marks on her chest. This is wrong to say that she had herself burnt her at her father-in laws place and then had got the fire extinguished just to bring pressure on her in-laws. 24. P.W. 7, Ram Pratap stated that Mala Rams daughter Smt. Lachmi was not being sent to her fathers house by Mani Ram, the father of the accused-appellant. A Panchayat was convened for this purpose. At the time when the Panchayat was being held Mani Ram called the witness quietly to a different place and told him about the money affair. When he asked Mani Ram about the details of money, Mani Ram told him that the person who has to pay the money would himself understand the same. Mani Ram told him that he would rehabilitate the girl only when he is paid Rs. 3,000/-. The witness told this fact only to Shrawan and to no one else in the Panchayat. According to this witness even Shrawan, P.W. 8, was taken aside & told this secretly. Then an agreement was arrived at before the Panchayat that Mani Ram would send Smt. Lachmi for 10 days to her fathers place and, thereafter, she would come back to her husbands place. 25. On being cross-examined, the witness stated that whatever he has stated to-day was told by him for the first time and that he had not told this to any-body else prior to this. The witness further stated that he had given statement before the police 7 or 8 days after the death of Smt. Lachmi. I had told P. W. 8, Shrawan, regarding the demand of money made by Mani Ram. The witness further stated that he does not know as to why the police had not recorded so in his statement Ex. D. 2. I had told P. W. 8, Shrawan, regarding the demand of money made by Mani Ram. The witness further stated that he does not know as to why the police had not recorded so in his statement Ex. D. 2. He had also stated before the police that Mani Ram had told him that Mala Ram would understand about the demand of money, but he does not know as to why this portion of his statement has not been recorded in the police statement. 26. P.W.8, Shrawan, stated that he had attended the Panchayat which was held to bring a settlement between Mani Ram and Mala Ram. In that Panchayat his caste fellows from 5 or 7 villages had assembled. The Panchayat was held to resolve the dispute why Mani Ram was not sending the wife of the accused appellant to her fathers place. He told Mani Ram that you send Smt. Lachmi to her fathers place, and that, if she does not come back, he will arrange for it. Mani Ram then called Ram Pratap, P. W 7, and talked to him separately. Mani Ram wanted Rs. 2,000/- to 3,000/- from the parents of Smt. Lachmi. The witness learnt after 15-20 days that Smt. Lachmi had died of burns. On cross-examination, the witness stated that there were no complaints regarding the character of Smt. Lachmi. Mani Ram had called Ram Pratap, P.W. 7, separately and then Ram Pratap came and told the witness that Mani Ram wants Rs. 2,000/- to 3,000/-. When Ram Pratap told him about this amount there was no body else except himself and Ram Pratap. On being cross-examined, the witness further stated that he cannot say how in Ex.D.3 at portion A to B, the name of Rati Ram and Ram Pratap have been written. 27. P.W.9, Shri R.K. Songara, Judicial Magistrate, Shri Ganganagar, stated that on the requisition Ex. P.8, from the police, he recorded the statement of Smt. Lachmi. The statement is Ex.P.ll. He stated that he recorded the statement correctly as stated by Smt. Lachmi. The Assistant Sub-Inspector had accompanied only upto the hospital and did not go to the room where the statement of Smt. Lachmi was recorded. 28. P.W.10, Gaja Nand, stated that he has a shop in Padampur. Mala Rams wife had come to take a loan of Rs. He stated that he recorded the statement correctly as stated by Smt. Lachmi. The Assistant Sub-Inspector had accompanied only upto the hospital and did not go to the room where the statement of Smt. Lachmi was recorded. 28. P.W.10, Gaja Nand, stated that he has a shop in Padampur. Mala Rams wife had come to take a loan of Rs. 3,500/- against her ornaments, but as he had no money with him, he could not advance money to her. 29. P.W.11, Mala Ram, stated that Lachmi was his daughter. She was married to the accused appellant about 4-1/2 years above. He had given ornaments, clothes, table, chairs etc. in dowry at the time of the marriage. The in-laws kept Smt. Lachmi well for about a year, but after that they started demanding 6,000/- rupees. He then paid Rs. 2,500/- , but could not arrange for the balance of Rs. 3,500/-. When he went to fetch Lachmi she was not sent on the pretext that Rs. 3,500/- have not been paid. But, when the witness told Lachmis in-laws that he had no money then she was sent the next day bare footed. The witness then called for a Panchayat in which the persons who had collected had made the in-laws of Lachmi understand not to insist for the money. He then arranged the Panchayat at the house of the accused-appellant in which PW.7, Ram Pratap and P.W. 8, Shrawan, also participated. The accused-appellants father then told Ram Pratap P.W.7, separately about the money. The witness expressed his inability to pay the money. Lachmi was sent after two days to his house. After 8 days, Om Prakash, the younger brother of the accused-appellant came to fetch Lachmi. Om Prakash demanded Rs. 3,500/-. Lachmi was also saying that she would not go unless the money is paid. She was also saying that if the money is not paid the in-laws would beat her. The witness then assured Lachmi that he would arrange for the money within two or three days and would send the same The Police constable on the second day at about 12 noon came and informed me that Lachmi was burnt and admitted to the hospital. He enquired from Smt Lachmi as to what was the cause of her injuries to which she replied that her husband had poured kerosene oil on her and burnt. He enquired from Smt Lachmi as to what was the cause of her injuries to which she replied that her husband had poured kerosene oil on her and burnt. On being cross examined, the witness stated that this is wrong to say that my elder daughter Shanti tried to commit suicide. This is wrong to say that Smt. Lachmi committed suicide and that at that time the accused appellant was working in the fields. This is wrong to say that Kishna Ram came to me on the day when incident took place and told that Smt. Lachmi had committed suicide. This is wrong to say that the witness stated that on the second enquiry he was satisfied that Smt Lachmi had committed suicide. 30. P.W. 12, Surendra Kumar, stated that on April 25, 1978, he was posted as S.H.O., Police Station Ghumarwali on the basis of the information report he had registered a case under section 307, I.P.C. on April 26, 1978. He was busy in other serious cases and, therefore he could not get time for investigation of this case on April 27,1978. He started enquiry in this case. He arrested the accused appellant on May 3, 1978. As Smt. Lachmi died during the investigation of the case, a case under sec. 302, IPC, was registered. On being cross-examined the witness stated that he had recorded the statement of Saheb Ram, the owner of a jeep. Saheb Ram stated that on the request of the accused-appellant he had taken the jeep from the place of the incident to the Ganganagar General Hospital. He further stated that he recorded the statements of Sita Devi, Om Prakash, Hukma Ram, Prithvi, Chena, Pana, Juglal, Hira Devi, Shatrughan, Krishna, Madu, Chunni, Hetram, Ram Pyari and Vidhya. These witnesses have stated that the accused was not at the place of incident and that they did not know anything about the burning of Mst. Lachmi. Some of the witnesses stated that deceased Lachmi did not want to stay with her in-laws house. A panchayat was held in the presence of the Additional Superintendent of Police. When the Additional S.P. asked persons present in the Panchayat whether they were satisfied that the accused-appellant has not burnt Mst. Lachmi, then the Sarpanch, Om Prakash and Deda Ram Panch took their children in their laps and went to the temple. A panchayat was held in the presence of the Additional Superintendent of Police. When the Additional S.P. asked persons present in the Panchayat whether they were satisfied that the accused-appellant has not burnt Mst. Lachmi, then the Sarpanch, Om Prakash and Deda Ram Panch took their children in their laps and went to the temple. These persons, in the presence of the deity with their children in their laps stated that we are satisfied that the accused Prithvi Raj has not burnt his wife Smt. Lachmi. In this Panchayat number of people from village Padampura from the side of Smt. Lachmi were present. The name of the Additional S.P. is Ram Swaroop Gupta. 31. The statement of accused-appellant Prithvi Raj, was recorded under section 313 Cr.P.C. He has denied that he had burnt Mst. Lachmi. The accused-appellant also submitted a written statement wherein he has stated that his wife was not happy at his place. No dowry was given to him. Lachmi herself poured kerosene on her and set fire to her clothes. Her entire family is accustomed to such acts. Her sister also tried to commit such act. When Lachmi set fire to herself I was in the field; on receiving the information I rushed to the house and took her to the hospital for treatment at my own expenses. 1 immediately got sent information to her parents. The parents of Smt. Lachmi also reached the hospital soon-after they heard about the incident. The Addl. Superintendent of Police had come and had satisfied himself about my innocence and that Smt. Lachmi had committed suicide. 32. D.W.1, Deda Ram stated that he is acquainted with Mani Ram and his son Prithvi Raj. When the Additional S.P., Shri Gupta came then he made enquiries and was satisfied that when Mst. Lachmi set fire to her clothes the accused-appellant Prithvi was working in the fields. On being questioned by Mala Ram, the Sarpanch and this witness went to the temple with the grand son and son and took special oath. Mala Ram refused to enter the temple. Mala Ram then went away. The Additional S.P., Shri Gupta was fully satisfied about the innocence of the accused. Then the Additional S.P. enquired from the neighbours Hukma Ram and Chunni Nath who also stated about the innocence of the accused. 33. Mala Ram refused to enter the temple. Mala Ram then went away. The Additional S.P., Shri Gupta was fully satisfied about the innocence of the accused. Then the Additional S.P. enquired from the neighbours Hukma Ram and Chunni Nath who also stated about the innocence of the accused. 33. D.W.2, Hukma Ram, stated that my house and the house of Prithvi are opposite to each other. Prithvis wife Lachmi used to remain mostly at Padampur. Six months before her death Smt. Lachmi had run away from the house. He had then gone along with others in search of her. She was found at the bus stand of village Kechia. About six months back when the witness was returning from the field he sat down at the house of the in-laws of Smt. Lachmi, at that time Prithvi was not in his house. Soon after there was a voice about the burning of a lady, he rushed to the fields and brought Prithvi. Prithvis mother was lying unconscious near a Balti. The father of Prithvi was pouring water on Smt. Lachmi. He also poured water on Smt. Lachmi. A number of neighbours came to the spot. Prithvi came after half an hour of the incident. Om and Pitha also accompanied Prithvi. Then Smt Lachmi was carried to the hospital in the jeep of Saheb Ram. The parents of Smt. Lachmi were immediately informed. He had not seen the in-laws of Smt. Lachmi misbehaving with her. The witness did not know in what manner the fire was set to the clothes of Smt. Lachmi. This is wrong to say that Prithvis parents demanded dowry from the parents of Smt. Lachmi and, for non-payment of dowry, Smt. Lachmi was maltreated. 34. D.W. 3, Om Prakash, stated that he knows the accused-appellant. About six months above Mst. Lachmi had sufferred injuries due to burning. The police came to make enquiry and the villagers had stated that Smt. Lachmi had committed suicide. Shri Surja Ram, Dy. S.P., was also informed that Smt. Lachmi had committed suicide. The Additional S.P., Narsinghpura also came to make enquiries. He was satisfied from the local enquiry that Smt. Lachmi had committed suicide. Lachmi had sufferred injuries due to burning. The police came to make enquiry and the villagers had stated that Smt. Lachmi had committed suicide. Shri Surja Ram, Dy. S.P., was also informed that Smt. Lachmi had committed suicide. The Additional S.P., Narsinghpura also came to make enquiries. He was satisfied from the local enquiry that Smt. Lachmi had committed suicide. The Sarpanch and the Pancha went to the temple with their grand-son and son on their laps and took special oath to the effect that Smt. Lachmi had committed suicide and that Prithvi Raj had not set fire to her. 35. D.W. 4, Shatrughan, has stated that when he had gone near the house of the accused at about 11 a.m., Mani Ram, Hukma Ram and some ladies were present there. Prithvi was not there. Prithvi came after 10 or 15 minutes. Om Prakash, his sister Vidhya and Chunni also came there. We asked Prithvi to get a Jeep. He went to Saheb Ram and brought a jeep. Then, Smt. Lachmi was taken in the jeep and was carried to General Hospital, Shri Ganganagar. Information was also sent to Mala Ram who also arrived at the hospital. This is wrong to say that Prithvi had burnt his wife for nonpayment of dowry. 36. D.W. 5, Mani Ram, stated that the accused-appellant is his son. He further stated that no dowry was being demanded from the parents of Smt. Lachmi. Mst. Lachmi had run away from the house about a year and half ago and then she was found at Kachiya from where she was brought back. At the time when Lachmi burnt herself Prithvi was not at the house. 37. D.W. 6, Chunni Nath, stated that the fields of the accused-appellant are near his fields. At 10 or 11 a.m. about 7 or 8 months back, the accused alongwith his brother Om Prakash with his sister Vidhya were working in the field. At that time, he heard that Smt. Lachmi had set fire to her clothes. On hearing this, Prithvi, his brother Om Prakash and his sister Vidhya ran towards the house. Prithvis mother was laying unconscious. On enquiry it was learnt that Prithvis wife herself had set on fire. Then Prithvi went to fetch a jeep. When the jeep arrived, Smt. Lachmi was taken to the General Hospital at Ganganagar. 38. The dying declaration made by Smt. Lachmi, Ex. Prithvis mother was laying unconscious. On enquiry it was learnt that Prithvis wife herself had set on fire. Then Prithvi went to fetch a jeep. When the jeep arrived, Smt. Lachmi was taken to the General Hospital at Ganganagar. 38. The dying declaration made by Smt. Lachmi, Ex. P.7, on April 25, 1978 before the Assistant Sub-Inspector Iqbal Singh is reproduced below:— ^^Jherh y{eh ckbZ iRuh i`Fohjkt tkfr dqEgkj mez 22 lky lkfdu ujflagiqjk eka>wckl rglhy ineiqj us c;ku fn;k fd esjh kknh pkj lky igys gqbZ Fkh] esjk ifr o esjh lkl llqj esjs lkFk vDlj yM+rs jgrs FksA esjk ifr eq>s /kedh nsrk jgrk Fkk fd eSa rq>s tykdj ekj nwaxkA vkt lqcg eSa vius ihgj ineiqj ls vius nsoj ds lkFk llqjky eka>wckl vkbZA djhc 10&11 cts dk le; gksxk fd eSa ?kj ds dksBk esa cSBh gqbZ FkhA esjs ifr us eq>s dgk fd ?kj ds ckgj fudy tk exj eSa dqN ugha cksyhA esjs ifr i`Fohjkt us dejs esa iM+h gqbZ feV~Vh ds rsy dh xsyu mBkdj feV~~Vh dk rsy esjs Åij fxjk fn;k vkSj ckgj vkaxu ls ekfpl mBkdj ds yk;k vkSj esjs vkx yxk nhA esjs igus gq, diM+s ?kk?kjk] dqjrk] vksM+uk dks vkx yx xbZA eSaus tksj tksj ls gsyk fn;k vkSj vkx ls tydj csgksk gksdj fxj xbZA okdk ds oDr esjk llqj euhjke vkSj lklw pSuk ikl gh njokts esa FksA os flykbZ dk dke dj jgs FksA eq>s irk ugha eq>s gksLihVy esa dkSu ysdj ds vk;kA c;ku nsrh gwWA dk;Zokgh ds okLrsA** 39. The dying declaration made by Smt. Lachmi on April 25, 1978 before the Judicial Magistrate is as under :— ^^esjh kknh dks pkj lky gks x,A esjh eka] cki us vPNh rjg ls kknh dh gqbZ FkhA esjs ls llqjky esa esjk ifr o lkl] llqj yM+rs Fks vkSj eq>ls yM+rs jgrs FksA vkSj dgrk esjk ifr ds esjs gkFk ls ej tk,xhA eSa Ms<+ lky rd vius ekrk&firk ds ?kj jgh eq>s ys tkrs ugha FksA esjs HkkbZ ls Hkh eq>s cksyus ugha nsrs vius ?kjA vkt losjs eSa vius llqjky esa vkaxu esa cSBh FkhA djhc 10&11 cts esjs ifr us esjs ij rsy ?kklysV mMS+yk vkSj ekfpl ls vkx yxk nh] fQj eSa fpYykbZ rks xkao ds vM+kSl&iM+kSl bdV~Bk gks x;k vkSj ogka [kM+s vknfe;ksa esa ls vkx cq>kbZA fQj eq>s vLirky esa esjk ifr o lklw llwjk ysdj vk;kA eSa vkt losjs vius ?kj cki ds ?kj ls xbZ Fkh ogka eq>s ?kj ls ckgj fudkyk eSa vUnj pyh xbZ FkhA 40. In the dying declaration Ex. P.7, Smt. Lachmi has stated that my husband used to give me threats that he would burn her to death, that she returned from her fathers place to-day and was sitting in the Kotha when her husband asked her to get out of the house. Then Prithvi Raj poured kerosene on her and then went out in the Angan and brought a match box and set fire to her. Her father-in-law, Mani Ram and mother-in-law, Chaina, were sitting near the gate and were doing stitching work. In Ex. P. 11, she stated that she was sitting in the Angan and not in the Kotha as stated by her in Ex. P. 7. She has further stated that her husband set fire to her clothes. On making a hue and cry, the persons who were standing there tried to extinguish the fire, I was carried to the hospital by my husband, mother-in-law and father-in-law. I had come from my parents house only to-day when I was asked to go out of the house, I went in the house. 41. There is no doubt that Smt. Lachmi received injuries by burning on April 25, 1978. The prosecution case is that kerosene was poured on her and her clothes were set on fire by her husband Prithvi. 41. There is no doubt that Smt. Lachmi received injuries by burning on April 25, 1978. The prosecution case is that kerosene was poured on her and her clothes were set on fire by her husband Prithvi. The defence version is that Smt. Lachmi had run away from the house even on an earlier occasion and was not satisfied with the conditions of her in-laws house. The defence version is that she herself committed suicide by pouring kerosene oil on her clothes and setting them on fire. It has also been contended that the accused Prithvi Raj was not present in the house at that time and was working in the fields. He came when he was called. It has been further contended that there is ample evidence to show that Prithvi went to Saheb Ram to get his jeep and then took Smt. Lachmi to the General Hospital, Shri Ganganagar. 42. The statement of the medical jurist has been recorded by the police on May 23, 1978, when the post-mortem had been conducted on April 28, 1978 and when the injury report was prepared soon after the admission of Mst. Lachmi in the hospital on April 25, 1978. From the statement of the medical jurist, it is evidently clear that the hairs on the head were neither signed nor burnt. This clearly goes to show that the fire started not from the head, but either from the lowest portion of her garments or from the middle portion. The statement of Smt. Lachmi before the A.S.I., Iqbal Singh, shows that she was sitting in the Kotha when Prithvi came and poured kerosene oil over her, then Prithvi went out to the Angan to bring a match-box. Both, Prithvi and Smt. Lachmi were 22 years of age. The parents of Prithvi were sitting just outside of the room and were doing stitching work. Smt. Lachmi should have resisted the act of Prithvi of pouring kerosene on her. When Prithvi went out of the Kotha to the Angan to fetch match-box, she could have rushed to the parents just sitting out-side for help because, the instinct of self preservation is the highest in a human being. She did not do so which is much contrary to a human being conduct. 43. When Prithvi went out of the Kotha to the Angan to fetch match-box, she could have rushed to the parents just sitting out-side for help because, the instinct of self preservation is the highest in a human being. She did not do so which is much contrary to a human being conduct. 43. In her statement before the Judicial Magistrate she has stated that she was sitting in the Angan where Prithvi came and poured kerosene on her and set fire to her. If this is correct, then the parents of Prithvi who were sitting there could have intervened unless there was a positive conspiracy between the parents and the son to burn Smt. Lachmi to death. This is important to note that the place of incident has totally changed in Ex. P. 7. It is the Kotha where she was sitting and kerosene was poured on her and Prithvi had gone out to fetch match box. In Ex. P. 11, in her statement before the Judicial Magistrate, the place of incident is the Angan and not Kotha and the question of fetching the match-box did not arise in this statement There is ample evidence on record to show that Prithvi got the jeep from Saheb Ram and carried Lachmi to the hospital. The parents of the accused-appellant accompanied him to the hospital. If Smt. Lachmi had been burnt by sprinkling kerosene by Prithvi Raj, the accused-appellant in connivance with his parents, then there was no reason why a jeep would immediately be arranged for her and the husband and in-laws would immediately take her to hospital. This conduct on the part of the husband and his parents clearly go to show that it is not a case where kerosene was poured by the husband on Smt. Lachmi and her clothes were set to fire, but it appears more a case of suicide by Smt. Lachmi. The Medical Report also does not support the prosecution version. If the prosecution story is believed to be true that Prithvi poured kerosene on Smt. Lachmi, then the fire would have been set on the top portion first as Prithvi was standing at that time. The Medical Report shows that the fire took place from the bottom of her garments or from the middle portion. If the prosecution story is believed to be true that Prithvi poured kerosene on Smt. Lachmi, then the fire would have been set on the top portion first as Prithvi was standing at that time. The Medical Report shows that the fire took place from the bottom of her garments or from the middle portion. The hair on the head or scalp were not affected; which means that no kerosene was poured on her head. Besides the part of her dying declaration Ex. P. 11 that upon her cries neighbours assembled there and some one amongst them put-out the fire stands uncorroborated as no such witness was produced. 44. The defence version has been lightly baushed aside by the learned trial court. When it was in evidence that a Sarpanch of the village and another panch had taken oath with their children in their laps on the enquiry by the Additional Superintendent of Police, Shri Gupta, then it was in the fitness of things that the statement of the Additional S.P., Shri Gupta, should have been recorded. Similarly, the statement of Dy. S.P., Surja Ram, who had gone there, should have been recorded. No reasons have been as signed by the prosecution for non-examination of these two police officers, who would have assisted the court in coming to the conclusion. 45. Even the story of demand of dowry does not stand the scrutiny at all. A Panchayat was summoned and the prosecution has relied on the statements of P.W. 7, Ram Pratap and Shrawan, P.W. 8. It has not been shown why the question of dowry was not discussed in the Panchayat and why Ram Pratap was taken to a lonely place and told so by the father of the accused-appellant. Ram Pratap, P.W. 7, does not divulge this fact to any body else in the Panchayat though hundreds of people had gathered. He simply states this to Shrawan and that too after taking him inside a Kotha. This conduct of P.W.7, Ram Pratap, appears to be wholly unnatural and renders the statements of these two witnesses wholly unworthy of any credence. He simply states this to Shrawan and that too after taking him inside a Kotha. This conduct of P.W.7, Ram Pratap, appears to be wholly unnatural and renders the statements of these two witnesses wholly unworthy of any credence. The question which was put before the Panchayat was why Smt. Lachmi is not being sent to her fathers place by the father of Prithvi and it was resolved by the Panchayat that after two days Smt. Lachmi would go to her fathers place and live there for 8 to 10 days and then would come back. The question of payment of dowry was not raised before the Panchayat and remained in obscurity in between Ram Pratap P.W. 7, Shrawan, P.W. 8 and Mani Ram, father of Prithvi Raj. On the basis of this wholly untrustworthy and unreliable piece of evidence, the learned trial court has come to a finding of guilt against the accused-appellant. 46. The dying declaration in this case, is a weak type of evidence and, unless corroborated by independent evidence, the conviction cannot be sustained on it. In the present case, there are 4 dying declarations. One made by Smt. Lachmi to the Medical Jurist, P.W. 1, Dr. R.K. Gupta the other made to her parents, the third dying declaration was made to Iqbal Singh. A.S.I, and the last one before the Judicial Magistrate, Mr. R.K. Songara. The dying declarations made to the Medical Jurist is wholly of a general type and does not give any details. The statement of the Doctor has been recorded after a great lapse of time, i.e. on May 23, 1978. The incident took place on April 25, 1978. The Jurist has made no note on the bed head ticket or in any of his communication to the police. 47. The dying declaration made before her father is of no-consequence and is only of a general nature. The statement made before Iqbal Singh, A.S.I, and Mr. Songara, the Judicial Magistrate, are Ex P. 7 and Ex. P. 11. The serious infirmities in these two declarations have been discussed above and no useful purpose would be served by repeating them again. 48. For the reasons stated above, we are of the considered opinion that the prosecution has failed to bring guilt home to the accused free from any manner of doubt. P. 11. The serious infirmities in these two declarations have been discussed above and no useful purpose would be served by repeating them again. 48. For the reasons stated above, we are of the considered opinion that the prosecution has failed to bring guilt home to the accused free from any manner of doubt. Under these circumstances, as the guilt has not been brought home to the accused, we are inclined to give him the benefit of doubt. 49. For the reasons stated above, the appeal filed by the accused-appellant is hereby accepted. The conviction and sentence awarded to the accused appellant is hereby set aside. The accused -appellant is acquitted of the charge under section 302, I.P.C. As the appeal filed by the accused-appellant is allowed, he shall be released from the judicial custody forth-with if not wanted in any other case.