JUDGMENT (ORAL) Chaudhari, J. - This appeal is filed against the judgment and order passed by the learned IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Satara dated 22.5.1992 convicting the appellant of an offence under Section 302 I.P.C. and imposing the sentence of imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/- in default to suffer R.I. for six months. 2. The appellant-accused Ramu Magaru Sonavane who was aged 60 years at the time of occurrence is the husband of the deceased Sarubai who was aged about 55 years at that time is alleged to have caused the death of Sarubai by setting her on fire after pouring kerosene on her person on 17.3.1991 at 9.30 p.m. in their hut situated at Balwadi Zopadpatti, Satara. 3. The case of the prosecution was as follows: Deceased Sarubai was the second wife of the appellant-accused. That was also the second marriage of Sarubai with the appellant. From his first wife the appellant has a son and a daughter and from her first husband, Sarubai had a daughter who is married to Baban (P.W. 4). At the material time, the appellant and Sarubai were separately residing in their hut. Baban was residing separately in the same Zopadapatti with his wife. There used to be domestic quarrels between the appellant and his wife. The appellant perhaps suspected the character and chastity of his wife and also suspected that his son in law Baban had illicit relations with her. On 17.3.1991 in the evening a dispute started between the husband and wife over some domestic problem and it is alleged that at about 9.00 p.m. the appellant poured kerosene on the person of Sarubai from a wicker lamp and set her clothes on fire by lighting a match stick. As a result of the bums lower portion of the body of Sarubai suffered injuries. The appellant himself extinguished the fire and removed the burning saree from the person of Sarubai and rushed to the house of Baban and called him. Meanwhile, hearing shouts of Sarubai, neighbours collected at their house. Baban immediately came to the spot along with the appellant. The appellant, Baban and others then removed the injured Sarubai to Civil Hospital, Satara and she was admitted in the said hospital. Sarubai however died in consequence of the bum injuries on 19.3.1991. Meanwhile, hearing shouts of Sarubai, neighbours collected at their house. Baban immediately came to the spot along with the appellant. The appellant, Baban and others then removed the injured Sarubai to Civil Hospital, Satara and she was admitted in the said hospital. Sarubai however died in consequence of the bum injuries on 19.3.1991. After Sarubai was admitted in the hospital information was conveyed to city Police Station, Salara. Head Constable Vithal Kikale (P.W. 5) proceeded to the hospital and recorded the statement of Sarubai. Further investigation was carried on by P.S.I. Waikar (P.W. 6). He arranged to get the statement of the injured recorded by the Special Executive Magistrate Sahebrao Sitaram investigation, he submitted the charge sheet against the appellant for offence under Section 302 I.P.C. The case was in due course committed to the Court of Session at Satara, The defence of the appellant was one of total denial. However, he made a statement at the end of his examination under Section 313 Cr. P.c. when he was asked whether he wanted to say anything more. We shall refer to that explanation in due course of discussion. 4. The prosecution adduced evidence of Dr. Sanjay Ramchandra Korde (P.W. 3) and produced the post mortem notes prepared by him. Prosecution also tendered the report of the Chemical Analyser, Exh. 25, which shows the burnt pieces of the saree of the deceased which were found at the spot of incident had residues of kerosene. Prosecution also relied upon the inquest panchanama and the panchanama of the scene of offence which shows that kerosene lamp was found at the place of incident and was seized at the time of panchanama which was made at about 9.30 on the morning of 18.3.1991. The wicker of the lamp was smelling of burnt kerosene. Dr. Korade deposed that Sarubai had suffered 60% bum injuries v on her person as described in the post mortem notes and that the probable cause of death of the deceased was septicemic shock due to the bum I injuries and those injuries were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause the death. The fact that Sarubai thus died as a result of bum injuries suffered by her on the night of 17.3.1991 has been clearly established and that fact has also not been disputed by the appellant. The fact is therefore satisfactorily proved. 5. The fact that Sarubai thus died as a result of bum injuries suffered by her on the night of 17.3.1991 has been clearly established and that fact has also not been disputed by the appellant. The fact is therefore satisfactorily proved. 5. According to the prosecution the author of the bum injuries suffered by Sarubai as a result of which she died was none else than the appellant himself. In order to establish that fact prosecution has mainly relied upon two dying declarations made by the deceased Sarubai implicating the appellant. The first dying declaration, Exh. 18 was in the form of a statement of Sarubai recorded by the Police Head Constable Vithal Kikale (P.W. 5) That was recorded at the hospital soon after Sarubai was admitted in the hospital. The second dying declaration, Exh. 15 was recorded by the Special Executive Magistrate, Sahebtao Shingate (P.W. 2) soon after midnight of 17.3.1991. By way of corroboration to the dying declarations the prosecution tendered, evidence of Baban Bhise (P.W. 4), and the panchanama relating to the seizure of articles from the scene of offence and the report of the Chemical analyser coupled with the medical evidence. 6. The learned trial Judge found that the dying declarations were duly proved and having regard to the other evidence adduced by the prosecution which was also worthy of reliance it was proved beyond doubt that it was the appellant who had set his wife on fire as a result of which she sustained bum injuries and eventually succumbed to the injuries and was therefore guilty of causing her death. 7.We have been taken through the evidence and after carefully considering the same, we are satisfied that the learned trial judge was right in coming to the conclusion that it was proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant was responsible for causing the death of his wife shall, however briefly indicate our reasons for which we are also inclined to accept the evidence. 8. We shall first deal with the evidence relating to the dying declarations. As stated earlier, the first dying deletion, Ex, 18 was recorded soon after Sarubai was admitted at the Civil Hospital, Satara. Baban (P.W. 4) has deposed that at about 10.15 p.m. on the night of incident, the appellant had gone to his house and informed him that Sarubai was burnt. As stated earlier, the first dying deletion, Ex, 18 was recorded soon after Sarubai was admitted at the Civil Hospital, Satara. Baban (P.W. 4) has deposed that at about 10.15 p.m. on the night of incident, the appellant had gone to his house and informed him that Sarubai was burnt. He, therefore rushed along will) the appellant to his house and saw his mother-in-law lying in the courtyard with burn injuries. He, therefore, brought a rickshaw and took her to the Civil Hospital where she was admitted. The appellant in his statement under Section 313 Cr. P.C. has admitted that he had called Baban after informing him that Sarubai was burnt and that Baban had come to his house. The fact that Sarubai was admitted to the hospital in injured condition is clearly established. Exhibit 18 then came to be recorded at the hospital. Police Head Constable Kikale (P.W. 5) has deposed that after Sarubai was admitted to the hospital he was asked by Dr. Korde to record the statement of the injured. Hence, he went to the burn ward, ward No. 12 along with Dr. Korde and recorded her statement. He deposed that the injured was conscious and was in a position to speak. Dr. Korde also told him that she was conscious and he could record her statement. He then asked the injured about the incident and recorded her narration. After completing the recording of the statement he obtained the thumb impression of the injured over it and also obtained the end or segment of the doctor over it to the effect that the injured was in a fit condition to have made the statement. Dr. Korde also has stated that he was present when the statement was recorded and that the patient was conscious and in a position to give a statement. He identified his endorsement and his signature, which he had put at that time on Exh. 18.The above evidence of these two witnesses clearly shows that Sarubai was in a fit condition to make a statement and was conscious. Evidence of Kikale (P.W. 5) further shows that he had recorded the statement as per the say of the patient and that besides himself and the doctor no one else was present near the patient when the statement was recorded. Evidence of Kikale (P.W. 5) further shows that he had recorded the statement as per the say of the patient and that besides himself and the doctor no one else was present near the patient when the statement was recorded. He deposed that in the statement injured Sarubai had stated to him that shall, however briefly indicate our reasons for which we are also inclined to accept the evidence. 8. We shall first deal with the evidence relating to the dying declarations. As stated earlier, the first dying declation, Ex. 18 was recorded soon after Sarubai was admitted at the Civil Hospital, Satara. Baban (P.W. 4) has deposed that at about 10.15 p.m. on the night of incident, the appellant had gone to his house and informed him that Sarubai was burnt. He, therefore rushed along with the appellant to his house and saw his mother-in-law lying in the courtyard with burn injuries. He, therefore, brought a rickshaw and took her to the Civil Hospital where she was admitted. The appellant in his statement under Section 113 Cr. P.C. has admitted that he had called Baban after informing him that Sarubai was; burin and that Baban had come to his house. The fact that Sarubai was admitted to the hospital in injured condition is clearly established. Exhibit 18 then came to be recorded at the hospital. Police Head Constable Kikale (P.W. 5) has deposed that after Sarubai was admitted to the hospital he was asked by Dr. Korde to record the statement of the injured. Hence, he went to the bum ward, ward No. 12 along with Dr Korde and recorded her statement. He deposed that the injured was conscious and was in a position to speak. Dr. Korde also told him that she was emotions and he could record her statement. He then asked the injured about the incident and recorded her narration. After completing the recording of the statement he obtained the thumb impression of the injured over it and also obtained the endorsement of the doctor over it to the effect that the injured was in a fit condition to have made the statement. Dr. Korde also has stated that he was present when the statement was recorded and that the patient was conscious and in a position to give a statement. Dr. Korde also has stated that he was present when the statement was recorded and that the patient was conscious and in a position to give a statement. He identified his endorsement and his signature, which he had put at that time on Exh. 18 The above evidence of these two witnesses clearly shows that Sarubai was in a fit condition to make a statement and was conscious. Evidence of Kikale (P.W. 5) further shows that he had recorded the statement as per the say of the patient and that besides himself and the doctor no one else was present near the patient when the statement was recorded. He deposed that in the statement injured Sarubai had stated to him that on that day of incident there was some quarrel between herself and her husband on some domestic reason. She also told him that her husband poured kerosene on her person and set fire to her and she was burnt. Turning now to the statement, Exh. 18 the account of the occurrence given by Sarubai herself was as follows: "Today on 17.3.1991 at about 6 p.m. there was a scuffle in between myself and my husband namely viz. Ramu Magru Sonawane for triffling reason in which he assaulted me and he poured kerosene on my person and set me on fire. Therefore dark blue coloured saree which was on my person took fire, by which there are burn injuries to my right hand elbow, wrist, on stomach, on waist and below part of waist on the private part i.e. the place for passing urine, on thigh, on knees on palm at right leg and on lower leg, on buttock, on back and in consequence thereof severe bums were caused. Since burn injuries were caused to me, I had raised alarm. That time was about 9.30 p.m.” (Translation as relied in lower Court) 9. There is absolutely nothing brought out in the cross examination of Head Constable Kikale or Dr. Korde to doubt the veracity of those two witnesses or to doubt that this statement was not true and voluntarily given by the, deceased in her own words when she was conscious and was aware as to what she was stating. The statement bears the endorsement made and proved by Dr. Korde and also bears the thumb impression of the deceased which stands proved from the evidence of Kikale (P.W. 5). The statement bears the endorsement made and proved by Dr. Korde and also bears the thumb impression of the deceased which stands proved from the evidence of Kikale (P.W. 5). 10. The second dying declaration is at Ex. 15. Sahebrab Shingate (P.W. 2) who was at that time serving as Awal Karkoon in Tehsil office at Satara had been given the powers of Special Executive Magistrate to record dying declarations. According to his evidence shortly after midnight on 17.3.1991 he received a police yadi and in pursuance of the same he went to the Civil Hospital. At the hospital he enquired from the doctor who was on duty whether the patient was conscious and was told by the doctor i.e. Dr. Korde (P. W. 3) that the patient was conscious and he could record her statement. Thereafter, he went to the burn ward where Sarubai was kept. He asked the relatives of Sarubai who were there at that time and the policemen to go out of the ward. After they left he asked the patient about her name and after she gave her name he asked her as to how the incident had occurred. Thereafter he recorded the narration of Sarubai as per her say. After Sarubai had completed her narration he obtained the thumb impression of Sarubai and put his signature. He also obtained the endorsement of the doctor. He then sealed the statement in an envelope and handed it over to the police on the next day. He identified the thumb impression of Sarubai appearing on the statement. He also put his endorsement on the case papers that he had recorded the statement. He deposed that the doctor was present all throughout when the statement was recorded. The above testimony is corroborated by the evidence of Dr. Korde and the police yadi (Ex. 13). Once again turning to the evidence of Dr. Korde (P.W. 3) he deposed in this connection that he was present when the dying declaration of Sarubai was recorded by Shingate (P.W. 2). He identified his endorsement on x. 15. He further stated that the patient was conscious and was in a position to give a statement. Ex. 14 shows that P.S.O. Satara Police Station had requested Shri Shingate the Special Executive Magistrate to record the statement and that yadi was received by Shingate at 0.15 hours. The dying declaration, Ex. He identified his endorsement on x. 15. He further stated that the patient was conscious and was in a position to give a statement. Ex. 14 shows that P.S.O. Satara Police Station had requested Shri Shingate the Special Executive Magistrate to record the statement and that yadi was received by Shingate at 0.15 hours. The dying declaration, Ex. 15 thus was recorded between 0.30 and 0.45 hours during the same night on which at about 9.00 p.m. Sarubai had suffered bum injuries. The dying declaration of Sarubai, Ex. 15 was as fallows: "I, Sarubai Ramu Sonawane age not known resident of Krishnanagar, huts, I myself and my husband reside together. Yesterday at evening (at about 5 to 6 pm) quarrel between me and my husband. My husband give fight by bamboo stick, then he took lamp and firebox, and lamp of pouring kerosine put on my person and he fired me. I have sustained injuries by burn under waist as well as on right hand and left hand. Then my husband stopped fire. Then my husband and other persons admitted me in Civil Hospital. The name of my son is Dhondiram, I did not know from 4 month as where he has gone. I have two married daughters. My one daughter Balutai Baban Bhise is residing at Krishnanagar. She is living away from us. Son-in-law is drived on jeep at Krishnanagar. He was came in Civil Hospital. This is true that my husband Ramu has fired me and sustained injuries. This statement given dt. 18.3.1991, statement recorded on 0.30 and completed at 0.45 a.m." (Translation as tendered in lower Court. The time mentioned 'a.m.', appears to be an obvious mistake.) 11. There is nothing in the cross examination of the witnesses who have deposed about the recording of this dying declaration namely Shingate (P.W. 2) and Dr. Korde (P.W. 3) to impeach the correctness of the record made while the patient was in a fully conscious condition to make the statement. Evidence also rules out possibility of any extraneous influence on the mind of the injured when the statement was made and thus the statement was a voluntary statement made by her. 12. Both the dying declarations have thus been proved. (We have perused the original marathi Statements). Both the statements are consistent with each other. Evidence also rules out possibility of any extraneous influence on the mind of the injured when the statement was made and thus the statement was a voluntary statement made by her. 12. Both the dying declarations have thus been proved. (We have perused the original marathi Statements). Both the statements are consistent with each other. In both the statements, Sarubai had stated that on the evening of 17.3.1991 at about 6.00 p.m. there was a quarrel between her and her husband and that during that quarrel the appellant had assaulted her and thereafter had poured kerosene on her person and set her on fire. The substratum of both the statements therefore is to implicate the appellant as the person who had caused her the burn injuries as a result of which she died subsequently. The other details stated by Sarubai in these two statements even if not word by word the same are to the same effect. In the first statement, Ex. 18 she stated that the quarrel was for a trifling reason and she was assaulted and then set on fire. In her statement exhibit 15, she stated that during the quarrel her husband beat her by bamboo stick. The impact of these two statements is one of the same namely that there was a quarrel between the two and in that quarrel the appellant had assaulted her and thereafter had set her on fire after pouring kerosene on her person. The part of the statements that kerosene was poured on her person is corroborated from the recovery of the kerosene lamp from the house of the appellant and the finding of residue of kerosene on the burnt pieces of saree found at the place of incident. We therefore find the version of the incident disclosed by Sarubai in these two dying declarations to the truthful and voluntary and we also find it convincing. All the steps required to be taken for proper recording of a dying declaration were taken by the person who had recorded those statements. The statements thus inspire total confidence and can be safely relied upon. We find these dying declarations trustworthy and find that these are corroborated by surrounding circumstances and that is sufficient to support the conviction of the appellant. Both the dying declarations have been recorded in the language of the deceased. Both bear her thumb impression. The statements thus inspire total confidence and can be safely relied upon. We find these dying declarations trustworthy and find that these are corroborated by surrounding circumstances and that is sufficient to support the conviction of the appellant. Both the dying declarations have been recorded in the language of the deceased. Both bear her thumb impression. We are therefore satisfied that the learned trial Judge was right in relying upon this piece of evidence against the appellant. The dying declarations at Ex. 15 shows that the quarrel between the husband and wife was over a trifle matter. However, the appellant in answer to question no. 12 in his statement under section 313 Cr. P.C. alleged that he suspected illicit relationship between his wife deceased Sarubai and his son-in-law Bahan (P.W. 4). He alleged that Sarubai had given false statement against him on the say of his son-in-law Baban. Although it is not the case of the prosecution that such a suspicion in the mind of the appellant was the motive for him to have committed this offence since the appellant him self brought out this story in his defence it is necessary to examine whether the evidence adduced by the prosecution could be doubted as interested evidence on that account. In this respect the appellant stated that Sarubai was his second wife. He however falsely stated that his age was 75 years and that of Sarubai 35 years. The record of the case shows that age of the appellant was about 60 years and that of Sarubai was 55 years as mentioned in the post mortem notes. Obviously the appellant had tried to create an impression by stating falsely that age of Sarubai was 35 years, that there was likelihood of her carrying on illicit relationship with Baban owing to her younger age as compared to his age which according to him was 75 years. He stated that Sarubai's daughter from first marriage, Shobha who was married to witness Baban had filed a criminal case against him and Sarubai and their sons Dhondiram and during the period of that case Baban had kept Sarubai hidden. He had therefore asked Baban to tell him the whereabouts of his wife as he was -required by the Chief Judicial Magistrate to keep her present in Court. However, at that time Baban told him that he should not enquire with him about his wife. He had therefore asked Baban to tell him the whereabouts of his wife as he was -required by the Chief Judicial Magistrate to keep her present in Court. However, at that time Baban told him that he should not enquire with him about his wife. Thereafter on the next day Sarubai came home and had reported that their son Dhondiram was absconding since one year and that he has now returned and therefore he i.e. appellant should go with her to Satara to meet him. Hence, he went along with Sarubai to Satara but discovered that the story told to him by Sarubai that Dhondiram had come back was not true. When he asked Sarubai about it, she told him that she had brought him to Satara for some work. He however told her that he was not in a position to work as he could not see things at night. He then told her to go back with him to their place but she told him that she will never go to their village because persons in their village used to damage her image saying that she was having illicit relations with her son-in-law. Thereupon he told her that if she was not going to go back with him then he will do something to his own life and left the place and sat in darkness at some distance away. Sarubai called him back twice but he did not reply. Thereafter she hurriedly went inside the hut and he did not know as to what happened thereafter. Then he tried to extinguish the fire over Sarubai. In the end he added "my wife Sarubai has given false statement against me at the say of son-in-law Baban Bhise". Apart from the fact that the relevance of the previous criminal case mentioned by him cannot be understood nor it can be understood as to how and when according to him the talk between him and his wife had taken place after he had gone to Satara, as suddenly towards the end of the statement he has referred to the hut in which the incident had taken place. He has not stated exactly where at Satara they had gone but obviously that was some place other than the hut in which they were residing. The crucial part of the statement relating to the alleged illicit relationship is also extremely vague. He has not stated exactly where at Satara they had gone but obviously that was some place other than the hut in which they were residing. The crucial part of the statement relating to the alleged illicit relationship is also extremely vague. He does not say that he himself had carried any such suspicion. According to him it was his wife who had told him at that time that villagers used to say damaging things about her. There is absolutely no evidence adduced by the accused in that respect nor there has been any cross-examination of prosecution witnesses including Baban on that aspect. The statement of the appellant himself goes to show that he had wanted his wife to go back with him as he is supposed to have told her that if she did not accompany him he will do something to his life. That shows that he had felt that his life without her would be miserable. Such could not be his mental attitude nor conduct if really there was any grain of truth in the alleged illicit relationship between Sarubai and Baban. What however is most pertinent to note is that Baban (P. W. 4) has not even been suggested anything in this respect in his cross- examination. It was also not suggested to him that it was at his instance that Sarubai had made false statement against the appellant. On the other hand in his cross-examination he has stated that he had never heard or said anything about any quarrel between the appellant and Sarubai. The version put up by the appellant therefore has no basis and appears to be wholly untruthful. Moreover, having regard to the fact that Sarubai was about 55 years old and Baban was in his 40's besides being son-in-law of Sarubai as Sarubai's daughter from first marriage was married to him it is difficult to imagine that there could have been any illicit affairs between him and Sarubai. 13. In the light of the above discussion we hold that the prosecution has proved by trustworthy evidence that it was the appellant who was the cause of the death of deceased Sarubai. 13. In the light of the above discussion we hold that the prosecution has proved by trustworthy evidence that it was the appellant who was the cause of the death of deceased Sarubai. The next question however is whether his act falls within the definition of murder as to be punished under Section 302 I.P.C. or whether it was an offence of a lesser degree falling under the definition of culpable homicide not amounting to murder and punishable under section 304 I.P.C. The learned trial Judge has taken the view that the offence committed by the appellant was that of murder and has therefore convicted him under Section 302 I.P.C. According to the learned Judge since the medical evidence shows that the bum injuries received by the deceased were sufficient in the ordinary nature to cause death, the appellant must be held to have caused those injuries with the intention of committing murder of the deceased or with the knowledge that his act of setting her on fire was so immediately dangerous that it must in all probability cause death of the deceased or such bodily injuries as were likely to cause her death. We, however find it difficult to sustain this finding of the learned trial Judge. In our view the offence would fall under Section 304 Part I of the I.P.C. for the following reasons: (i) Having regard to the old age and his explanation under section 313 Cr. P.C. which shows that he had no hatred for his wife but had desired her company, the appellant was not likely to have intended to cause her death as there was no serious quarrel between them. (ii) Total absence of any evidence of motive adduced by the prosecution. The act of the accused in setting his wife on fire cannot be said to have been premeditated. (iii) The dying declarations made by the deceased herself show that the quarrel was over a trifle matter and the physical assault made by the appellant on the deceased during the quarrel could not be regarded as so unnatural as could not have taken place unless it was coupled with the intention to cause more serious harm having regard to the Brata of the society of the parties and their ages. (iv) The dying declarations made by the deceased shows that it was the appellant himself who had extinguished the fire and had also taken her to the hospital along with others. The appellant also stated in his statement that he had tried to extinguished the fire although the prosecution has not led any evidence on that aspect. 14. There is on record a copy of yadi under which P.S.O. Satara city had requested the Special Executive Magistrate Shri Shingate to record the dying declarations of the deceased at the hospital. That letter has been admitted to evidence and was marked Ex. 14. From that letter it is seen that the appellant whose age was stated to be 65 years had also 3% burn injuries and he was also admitted to the hospital. Evidence of P.S.I. Waikar (P.W. 6) who was the Investigating Officer shows that when he arrested the appellant he was having bum injuries over his hand and therefore he was sent to the hospital for medical examination. This evidence shows that the appellant himself had extinguished the fire after he had seen that his wife was burning as a result of whatever he had done earlier. Hindi Matter 15. It appears that during the quarrel in a fit of anger although the appellant had done the rash act of pouring kerosene from the lamp on the person of Sarubai and had also set her on fire, he had immediately realised that the consequence of his act would be far more serious and seeing the saree of his wife burning he himself removed that saree and had extinguished the fire and. tried to save her. That shows that the state of mind of the appellant was not to see that his wife was done away with but he wanted her very much to remain alive. The evidence shows that most of the bums were on the lower part of the body below the waist and that also suggest that the appellant had tried to extinguish the fire within moment after, the saree on the person of the deceased was ablaze. The evidence shows that most of the bums were on the lower part of the body below the waist and that also suggest that the appellant had tried to extinguish the fire within moment after, the saree on the person of the deceased was ablaze. It is, therefore, difficult to gather from the conduct of the appellant which is revealed from the evidence itself that he had set his wife on fire either with the intention to cause her death or with the intention of causing such bodily injuries to her as would be sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. The circumstances on the other hand are consistent with the situation where the appellant appears to have done the act with the intention or causing such bodily injuries to his wife as were likely to result her death. The knowledge about the sufficiency of the consequential injuries for bringing about the death in the ordinary course of nature is difficult to be attributed to the appellant. We are, therefore of the view that the offence committed by the appellant would fall under section 299 I.P.C. punishable under Section 304 Part I of the I.P.C. We accordingly alter the conviction of the appellant for offence under Section 304 Part 1 I.P.C. 16. On the question of sentence we are of the opinion that having regard to the age of the appellant and the manner in which the offence was committed particularly in the absence of any evidence of premeditation or motivation on the part of the appellant being disclosed from the evidence that a sentence of R.I. for 7 years would meet the ends of justice. We are, therefore inclined to reduce the sentence accordingly. Moreover having regard to the poor conditions of the appellant as can be seen from the evidence and as he docs not appear to have been capable of doing any manual work due to old age and poor eye sight, we feel that the amount of fine should be reduced to Rs. 500/- ant the default sentence may be reduced to a period of R.I. for two months. 17. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. 500/- ant the default sentence may be reduced to a period of R.I. for two months. 17. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. The conviction of the appellant under section 302 I.P.C. is altered to conviction for the offence punishable under Section 304 Part I of the I.P.C. The sentence of imprisonment for life and fine imposed upon the appellant by the trial court is altered and the appellant is sentenced to suffer R.I. for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs 500/- in default to suffer further R.I. for two months for the offence punishable under Section 304 Part I of the I.P.C. The appellant will be entitled to the set off for the period undergone in custody Excess fine if paid be refunded. Appeal partly allowed. Conviction u/s. 302 I.P.C. set aside.