Honble JAIN, J.–This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 21/4/1995 passed by the learned Additional Sessions, Judge No. 2, Nohar whereby the learned Sessions Judge has convicted the accused-appellant for offences u/Ss. 302 and 450 IPC and sentenced her to imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default of payment to undergo simple imprisonment for two months for the offence u/S. 302 IPC and to 5 years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for one month for offence u/S. 450 IPC. Both the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently. (2) The deceased Smt. Kamla was married to Kohar singh (PW 5) some three years before the occurrence. She was physically handicapped. The occurrence took place on 23/8/1994 at 7.00 a.m. Kohar Singh had gone to his field and Smt. Kamla was preparing chapaties in the kitchen. It is alleged that accused Smt. Hasti Devi w/o Veer Singh tress-passed into her house and tried to strangulate her. Smt. Kamla resisted. Thereupon Smt. Hasti sprinkled and poured kerosene oil on the person of Smt. Kamla from two bottles which she was carrying with her. She lit a match stick and put her on fire. There was a disturbance in the house of Smt. Kamla. It attracted the attention of Suman (PW 1) and Smt. Savitri (PW 3). Suman (PW 1) reached the house of Smt. Kamla but the main door was bolted from inside. Dharmpal (DW 1), Balveer and Shri Ram also assembled in-front-of the house of Smt. Kamla. Savitri also came there. Suman (PW 1) asked Shri Ram t o enter into the house of Smt. Kamla and open the door. Shri Ram accordingly went inside the house of Smt. Kamla and opened the door. Suman entered the house but the accused threw a gota towards her. She, therefore, came out and accused bolted the door again from inside. Thereafter, Suman went to summon Kohar Singh from the field and informed him that the accused was beating Kamla with stick. Kohar Singh immediately rushed to his house and saw Dharmpal, Balveer, Shri Ram and Ran Singh standing outside his house. Shortly his brother Munshi Ram (PW 4) also reached there. Ran Singh and Munshi Ram went to the roof of other house and opened the door after jumping into his house. Kohar Singh immediately rushed to his house and saw Dharmpal, Balveer, Shri Ram and Ran Singh standing outside his house. Shortly his brother Munshi Ram (PW 4) also reached there. Ran Singh and Munshi Ram went to the roof of other house and opened the door after jumping into his house. Kohar Singh and Munshi Ram saw the accused burning Smt. Kamla. The accused had sprinkeled kerosene oil on Smt. Kamla and has also put wood over her body. Smt. Kamla was burning. The accused was armed with a knife. Kohar Singh and Munshi Ram pushed Smt. Hasti aside and put gudras over the body of Smt. Kamla in order to extinguish the fire. Thereafter, Dharmpal was asked to bring a jeep which the brought. He and Munshi Ram then lifted Kamla, put her in the jeep and brought her to the police station and thereafter to the hospital. They reached the hospital at 10:00 a.m. The S.H.O. followed them and reached the hospital immediately thereafter. Mumtaj Ali (PW 12) and Moti Ram (PW 13) immediately reached the hospital. Moti Ram immediately moved an appli- cation Ex.P-17 to Dr. Ramlal (PW 8) in order to obtain his opinion as to whether Smt. Kamla was in a fit mental condition to give statement. Dr. Ramlal examined the condition of Smt. Kamla and recorded his opinion on Ex.P-17 to the fact that Smt. Kamla was in a fit condition to give her statement. Moti Ram then proceeded to record the statement of Smt. Kamla which is Ex.P-18. Shri Moti Ram questioned Smt. Kamla and asked Mumtaj Ali to scribble the same. At the time of recording her statement Ex.P-18, there was no other person present except the Medical Officer Ramlal. In Ex.P- 18, Smt. Kamla stated that she was married to Kohar Singh three or two years back. On that day, her husband and gone to his field and she was alone in the house. She was preparing chapaties. At 7:30 a.m., the accused Hasti tresspa- ssed into his house and came straight to her and tried to strangulate. She resisted and raised an alarm. Smt. Hasti then fell her down on the ground and after pouring kerosene oil over her body from the bottles she lit a match-box and put her on fire. Her alarm attracted persons of the vicinity who tried to save her. She resisted and raised an alarm. Smt. Hasti then fell her down on the ground and after pouring kerosene oil over her body from the bottles she lit a match-box and put her on fire. Her alarm attracted persons of the vicinity who tried to save her. She stated that she was burnt to death on account of enemity. She further stated that she was bro- ught to the hospital by her husband Kohar Singh. On the basis of this dying declaration (Ex.P-18), Bhaglaram, S.H.O. (PW 11) registered a case for offences u/S. 452 and 307 IPC. He then reached the hospital. The Medical Officer informed him that Kamla had died. He moved an application Ex.P-23 for conducting autopsy over the body of Smt.Kamla. The autopsy was conducted by Dr. Ramlal (PW 8). He found four lacerated wounds on the upper and lower lips of the size 1/2" x 1/4" x 1/8". The injuries were simple and caused by blunt weapon. She had sustained over 60% burn injuries. She succumbed to the above injuries on account of the resultant shock. The postmortem report is Ex.P-19. Bhaglaram also prepared the inquest report Ex.P-4. He seized the clothes worn by Smt. Kamla at the time of incident. They were stained with blood and smelled of kerosene. He also found pieces of glass bangles lying at the place. He also collected pieces of wood and coal found at the place of occurrence and seized and sealed the same and prepared seizure memo Ex.P-8. He also collected the blood stained and controlled soil vide seizure memo Ex.P-9 and Ex.P-10. (3). It may also be stated that Hasti, accused was also medically examined on 24/8/1994 by Dr. Ramlal as there were injuries on her person. According to her injury report Ex.P-20, she was found to have the following injuries :- 1. Lacerated wound 3/4" x 1/8" x 1/8" on the left dorsally placed. 2. Abrasion 1/2" x 3/8" on the left middle finger (distal part) dorsally. 3. Lacerated wound 1/2" x 3/8" x 1/8" on the left index fingure (middle part) dorsally. 4. Lacerated wound 3/4" x 1/4" x 1/8" on right middle fingure (middle part) on the palmer side. (4) All the injuries were simple in nature caused by blunt weapon. The duration of the injuries was within 36 hours. The Investigating Officer was within 36 hours. 4. Lacerated wound 3/4" x 1/4" x 1/8" on right middle fingure (middle part) on the palmer side. (4) All the injuries were simple in nature caused by blunt weapon. The duration of the injuries was within 36 hours. The Investigating Officer was within 36 hours. The investigating Officer examined the material prosecution witnesses and after collecting the incriminating evidence filed a charge- sheet against the accused in the Court of Civil Judge(JD) Judicial Magistrate, Bhadra on 4/4/1994. The learned Magistrate committed the accused to the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge No. 2 who framed charges u/Ss. 450 and 302 IPC. The accused denied the indictment and claimed trial. The prosecution has examined as many as 13 witnesses. In her examination u/S. 313 Cr.P.C., the accused denied to have burnt Smt. Kamla. She has stated that on the day of occurrence she had a quarrel with Munshi Ram and the latter had assaulted her. While she was returning from her field, she saw the jeep carrying Kamla. She got the jeep stopped and had a talk with Kamla. Kamla told her that she was assaulted by Munshi Ram. She accompanied Kamla in the jeep but she was arrested by Bhaglaram. She has produced Dharmpal (DW 1) in her defence. (5) The learned Sessions Judge, after due appreciation of the prosecution evidence, came to the conclusion that the dying declaration of Smt. Kamla contained in Ex.P-18 was trust-worthy, reliable and given by Smt. Kamla in a fit mental condition which could, in the facts and circumstances of the case, form basis for conviction. He further relied on the statements of Kohar Singh and Munshi Ram and also derived corroboration from the other witnesses though they turned hostile. He, therefore, convicted and sentenced as stated above. (6) We have heard Shri M.L. Garg, learned counsel for the appellant and Shri S.R. Singhi, learned P.P. for the State. (7) Shri Garg has vehemently assailed the conviction and sentence ofthe accu- sed on several grounds. In the first instance he attacked the varacity and truthfulness of the dying declaration Ex.P-18 on the ground that it is doubtful as to who recorded the above dying declaration. From the statement of Mumtaj Ali and Moti Ram, it is clear who interrogated Smt. Kamla. It appears that perhaps Mumtaj Ali interrogated and recorded the statement while Moti Ram was just sitting there. From the statement of Mumtaj Ali and Moti Ram, it is clear who interrogated Smt. Kamla. It appears that perhaps Mumtaj Ali interrogated and recorded the statement while Moti Ram was just sitting there. The dying declaration does not contain he signature of the Medical Officer certifying that Smt. Kamla was in a fit mental condition to have given the above statement. According to the medical evidence, Smt. Kamla sustained more than 60% burn injuries and she was under sedatives. In such a condition it was not possible that Smt. Kamla could have given her statement coherently and correctly. The possibi- lity of tutoring can also not be ruled out. Dharmpal (DW 1) has stated that in the jeep, Kohar Singh had asked Kamla to implicate Hasti. At the time of recording the above dying declaration, Kohar Singh was present there. It was, therefore, possible that she gave the statement under the influence of Kohar Singh. It was absolutely necessary for the Investigating Officer to have obtained the services of a Judicial Magistrate in order to lend credence to the statement of Smt. Kamla. (8) Shri Garg also took us through the prosecution evidence and submitted that the testimony of the material prosecution witnesses is full of contradictions and inconsistencies. Suman (PW 1) is not at all reliable witness. She has been confronted with her police statement Ex.D-1 and she has contradicted herself on very material and vital points. Shri Ram (PW 2) and Savitri (PW 3) have turned hostile to the prosecution and they have not supported the prosecution version. Dharmpal (DW 1) has been examined and from his statement it is clear that Kamla was not burnt by Hasti. On the contrary, even from the prosecution evidence, it is clear that when Kohar Singh and Munshi Ram were taking Smt. Kamla in the jeep to the hospital, the accused met on the way and signalled the jeep to stop and she boarded the jeep and enquired as to what had happened. The conduct of the accused is suggestive of her innocence. She has been implicated on account of the tutoring of Kohar Singh. Shri Garg has also pointed out that according to Kohar Singh two empty kerosene bottles were lying at the place of the occurrence and the same were taken away by the Investigating Officer but the Investigating Officer has denied this fact. She has been implicated on account of the tutoring of Kohar Singh. Shri Garg has also pointed out that according to Kohar Singh two empty kerosene bottles were lying at the place of the occurrence and the same were taken away by the Investigating Officer but the Investigating Officer has denied this fact. This is a very material contradiction and must be taken into account while scanning the prosecution evidence. there is also contradiction as to who opened the door. Shri Garg also suggested that Smt. Kamla was admittedly physically handicapped as his two limbs were not healthy. The possibility cannot be ruled out that on account of depression or epileptic fits she got herself burnt while cooking the food. (9) We have given our carefull consideration to the submissions made at the Bar. We have also considered the material on record and the evidence through which we have been taken by Shri Garg. (10) At the very outset, we may state that it has not been disputed by Shri Garg that Smt. Kamla died on account of sustaining 60% burn injuries. Hence, the cause of death is not in dispute. The question that, therefore, falls for determination whether her death was homicidal or suicidal. (11) First, we may consider the dying declaration. In Khushall Rao vs. State of Bombay (1), the Apex Court had held that it is not an absolute rule nor even a rule of prudence that has ripened to a rule of law that dying declaration to sustain the order of conviction, must be corroborated by other independent evidence. The rule of corroboration requires that the dying declaration be subjected to close scrutiny since the evidence is untested by cross-examination. The declaration must be accepted unless such declaration can be shown not to have been made in expectation of death or to be otherwise unreliable. Any evidence adduced for this purpose can only detract from its value but does not effect its admissibility. The dying declaration, therefore, may be tested as any other piece of evidence. Once the court reaches the conclusion that the dying declaration is true, no question of corroboration arises. The dying declaration cannot be placed in the same category as evidence of an accomplice or a confession. The dying declaration, therefore, may be tested as any other piece of evidence. Once the court reaches the conclusion that the dying declaration is true, no question of corroboration arises. The dying declaration cannot be placed in the same category as evidence of an accomplice or a confession. (12) It is a settled law by series of judgments of Apex Court that the dying declaration, if after careful scrutiny, the court is satisfied that it is true and free from any effort to induce the deceased to make a false statement and if it is coherent and consistent, there is no legal impediment to form such a dying declaration the base of conviction, even if there is no corroboration. Reference may be made to Tarachand Damy Suthar vs. State of Maharashtra (2), Kusa vs. State of Orrisa (3), Meesala Ramkrishnan vs. State of Andhra Pradesh (4) and Gordhan Raoji vs. State of Maharashtra (5). (13) Now, we may scan the dying declaration Ex.P-18 in the light of the above principles. Moti Ram (PW 13) has stated that after observing the condition of Smt. Kamla, he thought it proper to get the dying declaration of Smt. Kamla recorded by a Magistrate. However, no Magistrate was available. He, therefore, moved an appli- cation Ex.P-17 before Dr. Ramlal to obtain his opinion whether Smt. Kamla was in a fit mental condition to make such a statement. Dr.Ramlal opined that Smt. Kamla was in a position to make such a statement. The Medical Officer recorded his opinion on the application itself. Thereafter, he interrogated Smt. Kamla and asked Mumtaj Ali to record the statement. Mumtaj Ali has stated that the above statement was recorded in presence of Dr. Ramlal. After recording the whole statement, Moti Ram also affixed the thumb mark of Smt. Kamla on Ex.P-18 at place `Y. The Medical Officer also put his signature at `A to `B on Ex.P-18 after the endorsement made by Shri Moti Ram. Moti Ram has categorically stated that he put the questions to Kamla and Mumtaj Ali recorded the answers given by her. He was asked a question as to why the signature of Kohar Singh was not obtained on Ex.P-18. His reply was that since Kohar Singh was not present it was not done. From the above it is clear that at the time of recording the statement, Kohar Singh was not present. He was asked a question as to why the signature of Kohar Singh was not obtained on Ex.P-18. His reply was that since Kohar Singh was not present it was not done. From the above it is clear that at the time of recording the statement, Kohar Singh was not present. Mumtaj Ali (PW 12) has also stated that he recorded the statement Ex.P-18 as per directions of Moti Ram. When he reached Smt. Kamla, her husband Kohar Singh was present but at the time of recording Ex.P-18 Kohar Singh was not present. Only Dr. Ramlal was present. Dr. Ramlal has corroborated the statements of Moti Ram and Mumtaj Ali. From the above it is clear that Moti Ram in the first instance tried to secure the presence of a Magistrate for recording the dying declaration of Smt. Kamla but since no Magistrate was available he thought it expedient to record the statement himself. It is correct that the statement was not recorded in question-answer form but it does not adversly affect the varacity of the statement. We have got no doubt that the statement was faithfully recorded by Mumtaj Ali at the instance of Moti Ram. A perusal of the statement contained in Ex.P-18 shows that it is coherent and consistent and inspires confidence. We are not impressed with the argument of Shri Garg that Smt. Kamla was not in fit mental condition to give the above statement. It is a matter of common knowledge supported by medical jurisprudence that in a case of burn, the victim does not loose consciousness and remain in a fit mental condition to talk coherently and correctly. Smt. Kamla sustained only 60% burn injuries and there is nothing on record to suggest that she was not medically fit to give the statement. After certification from Dr. Ramlal, we are fully satisfied that she was in a fit mental condition to make the above statement. We are further of opinion that at the time of recording the above statement, even Kohar Singh was not present there. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there was no other alternative except recording the statement of Smt. Kamla by the Investigating Officer. Merely that the Doctor put his signature after the endorsement of the police cannot render the statement doubtful. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there was no other alternative except recording the statement of Smt. Kamla by the Investigating Officer. Merely that the Doctor put his signature after the endorsement of the police cannot render the statement doubtful. The Medical Officer not only recorded his opinion on Ex.P-17 but also put his signature in Ex. P-18 clearly suggested the fact that Smt. Kamla was in a fit mental condition to make the above statement and that the above statement was made naturally. (14) We also do not find any material on record even to entertain the possibility that since Smt. Kamla was substantially physically handicapped, she could not commit suicide. If we take into consideration the circumstances of the case, it would be clear that at that time she was preparing chapaties, she was having two months pregnancy. She was in consciousness when she was being taken to the hospital and she remained conscious and alert before her death. These circumstances also rule out any hypothesis that she might have burnt accidently on account of fits. The evidence of tutoring has been given by Dharmpal (DW 1). It appears that Dharmpal has gone hostile to the prosecution and that is why he was produced as a defence witness. Even if Kohar Singh wanted to tutor to Kamla, he would have never done so in presence of Dharmpal who was driving the vehicle at that time. Hence, Dharmpals statement regarding tutoring is not at all true and worthy of belief. Moreover, there must be some reason for implicating an innocent person. There is nothing on record why Kohar Singh should have been attempted to implicate Hasti by tutoring Kamla. We, therefore, hold that Smt. Kamla made the above statement shows that she has given a consistent and coherent version of the events happened on that day. It is also suggestive of the fact that the above statement has been given by a person having consciousness and mental balance. (15) In this connection we would like to refer to a recent case of the Apex Court in Bhagirath vs. State of Haryana (6). In that case, the statement was recorded by the head- constable for the purpose of registering a case after obtaining the certificate from the doctor about the of the injured. The head-constable was having no intention to record the statement as dying declaration. In that case, the statement was recorded by the head- constable for the purpose of registering a case after obtaining the certificate from the doctor about the of the injured. The head-constable was having no intention to record the statement as dying declaration. The head-constable made genuine effort to get the dying declaration recorded by a Magistrate but they were not available. The doctor certified that the person was physically competent to make the statement. Merely on account of the fact that the doctor was not present throughout when the dying declaration was recorded cannot render the dying declaration doubtful. Conviction was maintained on such a dying declaration. We, therefore, find the dying declaration Ex.P-18 wholly reliable. We have already stated that it is a settled law that if the court, after careful scrutiny of the statement, find that it is true and free from any efforts to induce the deceased to make a false statement, it can legally be made a basis for sustaining a conviction. (16) We may now advert to the ocular evidence which also lends corroboration to the above dying declaration. Suman (PW 1) is a child witness. She has stated that on the day of occurrence she heard some disturbing voice coming from the house of Kohar Singh. The house of Kohar Singh is adjacent to her house. She went to the house of Kohar Singh which was bolted from inside. With the help of Shri Ram she got the door opened. As soon as she went inside the house she was greeted by a gota thrown by the accused. She, therefore, came out immediately and the accused again closed the door. She had seen the accused administering beating to Smt. Kamla and she was also burning her with burning wood. She, therefore, ran to inform Kohar Singh about the incident. She told Kohar Singh that the accused was beating Smt. Kamla. Kohar Singh came and climbed over the roof and entered the house. She has also stated that Dharmpal, Balveer, Shri Ram etc. were present in-front-of the house of Kohar Singh. However, her statement does not appear to be fully correct or truthful inasmuch as there are various material contradictions between her court statement and the statement she gave u/S. 161 Cr.P.C. before the police. She has also stated that Dharmpal, Balveer, Shri Ram etc. were present in-front-of the house of Kohar Singh. However, her statement does not appear to be fully correct or truthful inasmuch as there are various material contradictions between her court statement and the statement she gave u/S. 161 Cr.P.C. before the police. In her police Statement Ex.D-1 she did not state that the accused was beating Kohar Singhs wife, that she was burning Kamla with burning wood and she also did not state that she told Kohar Singh that the accused was beating Kamla. Shri Ram (PW 2) has stated that at about 7:00 a.m. he was standing in-front-of his house. Balveer and Dharmpal told him that there is some disturbing voice was coming from the house of Kohar Singh and there were also flames of the fire coming out of that house. He, therefore, climbed over the roof of Gangaram and entered the house. Surat Singhs wife Savitri was standing outside the gate. He asked Savitri to go inside as he suspected Kamla might have got fits. Savitri proceeded a little and then returned back. He has been declared hostile to the pro- secution. In his police statement Ex.D-1, he has stated that Savitri informed that the accused setting Kamla on fire. He denied the same in his court statement. But, he admitted that Hasti was inside the house of Kohar Singh and she warned him not to enter into the house. He further stated that thereafter Hasti closed the door. Savitri (PW 2) has also turned hostile to the prosecution. She has stated that she came to the house of Kohar Singh but the doors were closed. Dharmpal, Balveer and Shri Ram were sitting there. She has admitted that Shri Ram climbed over the roof and opened the door of Kohar Singh. She has also admitted that she was asked to go inside the house and see what was happening. She, however, did not go but Suman went inside the house. Kohar Singh was summoned by Suman. She further admitted that when she tried to enter into the house, Hasti warned her not to enter. Munshi Ram (PW 4) has stated that Prabhurams son came to his field and informed about the incident. He came to the house of Kohar Singh. When he and Kohar Singh went inside the house and found the accused attempting to burn Kamla. Munshi Ram (PW 4) has stated that Prabhurams son came to his field and informed about the incident. He came to the house of Kohar Singh. When he and Kohar Singh went inside the house and found the accused attempting to burn Kamla. She had sprinkeled kerosene oil over the body of Kamla and set her to fire. She has also put some woods over her body. He and Kohar Singh pushed the accused aside and put gudras over her body. Thereafter he and Kohar Singh brought Kamla to the hospital. He has stated that the accused killed Kamla on account of land dispute. He has also shown the presence of Dharmpal, Shri Ram and Ran Singh etc. Kohar Singh (PW 5) has stated that Suman met him while he was returning from his field. When he reached his house, doors were bolted from inside. Dharmpal, Balveer, Shri Ram and Ran Singh were present there. Shortly Munshi Ram also came there. He and Munshi Ram entered the house and saw the accused burning Kamla. His statement is almost identical with the statement of Munshi Ram. He has further stated that two empty bottles were lying there. The S.H.O. took away the same with him. While they were proceeding to the hospital, Hasti also boarded the jeep. Dharmpal (DW 1) has stated that Kohar Singh came to him and told that his wife has burnt. He asked for providing jeep. He provided the same. He, Kohar Singh and Munshi Ram took Smt. Kamla to the hospital. On the way, the accused got the jeep stopped and she boarded it. He has stated that Kohar Singh has stated that Kamla was burnt in the house. On the way Kohar Singh asked Kamla to implicate Hasti. In cross-examination he has admitted that Suman came to him but he did not enter into the house of Kohar Singh but remained standing outside. (17) From the above evidence it has been proved beyond reasonable doubt that when Kamla was burnt, the accused was inside the house and she had bolted the door from inside. First Shri Ram entered the house by climbing over the roof and Suman went inside but she was threatened by the accused. Hence, she came out. Suman then informed Kohar Singh when the latter was returning from the field. First Shri Ram entered the house by climbing over the roof and Suman went inside but she was threatened by the accused. Hence, she came out. Suman then informed Kohar Singh when the latter was returning from the field. Kohar Singh and Munshi Ram together entered into the house and saw the accused standing there watching Kamla burning. There is a contradiction in the statement of Kohar Singh regarding kerosene bottles. Munshi Ram has denied the presence of bottles in the house. The Investigating Officer has also denied that any bottles were found in the house of Kohar Singh. (18) There is no reason why Kohar Singh and Munshi Ram should not be belie- ved. Their statements are trust-worthy and reliable. It may also be stated that before the case was formally registered on the statement given by Smt. Kamla, Moti Ram (PW 13) had already received a secret information on the same day at 9:00 a.m. that Smt. Kamla was burnt by the accused. (19) From the above evidence it has been proved that the accused tresspassed into the house of Kohar Singh with the intention to commit her murder and Kamla was murdered by her. We, therefore, hold that the learned Sessions Judge has correctly convicted and sentenced the accused. (20) For the reasons stated above, we do not find any force in the appeal and it is hereby dismissed.