Judgment A.K.Prasad, J. 1. The sole appellant has been convicted under Sections 302 and 304 of the Indian Penal Code on the charge of committing the murder of his wife (Surti Devi) and for causing death of his son (Brajesh Kumar) respectively, and sentenced to life imprisonment and rigorous imprisonment for ten years respectively thereunder vide judgment and order dated 30.6.1994 in S.T. No. 301 of 1990, passed by Sri Satyendra Singh, the then Addl. Sessions Judge, Bokaro. However, both the sentences have been directed to run concurrently. 2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case, as made out in the fardbeyan (Exhibit 2) of Satyanand Singh (PW 2) recorded by the police officer (PW 7) at Jhopri Colony within P.S. Marafari, district Bokaro at 7 p.m. on 19.4.1990 is as under On 19.4.1990 at about 1.30 p.m., the informant (PW 2) was at his house and on the alarm, he came out and found that the house of the appellant, which is at a distance of about 200 yards, was burning and large number of people were making efforts to extinguish the fire. The informant also joined in it and started to put out the fire by throwing water from the rear. The door of the house was locked from outside. The people pulled down thereof and then the fire could be extinguished. When the informant came in front of the house of Shivdahin Sharma (the accused/appellant), when the fire was brought under control, he came to known that Brajesh Kumar, the son of the appellant, had been badly burnt and had been kept at the house of Gangadhar Das (PW 3). The informant went and saw Brajesh Kumar, the ten-year-old son of the appellant, who had severe burn wounds and he disclosed that his father had burnt his mother, namely, Surti Devi. Surti Devi was burnt to death in the house engulfed by the fire. The informant took injured Brajesh Kumar for treatment to Dr. J.N. Prasad (PW 1), who practices in Jhopri colony. He gave first-aid to Brajesh Kumar and advised the informant and those who had accompanied Brajesh Kumar to admit him in Bokaro General Hospital for proper treatment. Thereafter, he was brought by them to Bokarao General Hospital and Brajesh Kumar stated before the doctor(s) in presence of the informant and others that the appellant-father had set fire to the house. He gave first-aid to Brajesh Kumar and advised the informant and those who had accompanied Brajesh Kumar to admit him in Bokaro General Hospital for proper treatment. Thereafter, he was brought by them to Bokarao General Hospital and Brajesh Kumar stated before the doctor(s) in presence of the informant and others that the appellant-father had set fire to the house. Brajesh Kumar was admitted to the aforesaid hospital, where he, ultimately, succumbed to the burn-wounds on 28.4.1990, while undergoing treatment. The appellant was a drunkard and he often assaulted his wife and he had burnt her and his son to death. The further prosecution case goes that on 19.4.1990 at about 5.30 p.m. an oral information was received at Marafari Police Station from one Ganesh Das to the effect that the house of the accused /appellant was on fire in which a women had died, whereupon the Police Officer (PW 7) made station diary entry No. 412 dated 19.4.1990 and along with other police personnel, he visited the spot, recorded the fardbeyan of the informant. On its basis, the present case came to be instituted, a formal first information report (Exhibit 5) was drawn up, PW 7 inspected the place of occurrence, held inquest over the dead-body of Surti Devi (Exhibit 3) is the carbon copy of the inquest report), sent it for post-mortem examination. He also held inquest over the dead-body of Brajesh Kumar, who had died in the burn-unit of Bokaro General Hospital on 29.4.1990 (vide Exhibit 3/T) and sent the dead-body for post-mortem examination to Referral Hospital, Chas, and on completion of investigation, charge-sheet was laid in Court against the accused/appellant. 3. The case was, ultimately, committed to the Court of Sessions by Sri S.K. Katriar, the then Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Chas. 4. The main defence is of innocence and false implication. The further defence, as gathered from the suggestion given to PWs is that there was an accidental fire, while Surti Devi, wife of the appellant was cooking food. 5. At the trial, the prosecution examined ten witnesses in support of its case. Out of them : PW 5 (Lakhan Das) is tendered, while PW 6 (Ram Bahadur Mahato) is a formal Investigating Officer, who simply submitted charge-sheet after examining the accused. The other PWs are : PW 1 (Dr. 5. At the trial, the prosecution examined ten witnesses in support of its case. Out of them : PW 5 (Lakhan Das) is tendered, while PW 6 (Ram Bahadur Mahato) is a formal Investigating Officer, who simply submitted charge-sheet after examining the accused. The other PWs are : PW 1 (Dr. J.N. Prasad), PW 2 (Satyanad Singh), the informant, PW 3 (Ganga Das), PW 4 (Ganesh Das), PW 7 (A.K. Jha) the Investigating Officer, PW 8 (Dr. Sharda Pd. Sinha), who held autopsy on the dead-body of Surti Devi, PW 9 (Dr. Ravishankar), who recorded the statement of Brajesh Kumar (Exhibit 6) about the cause as to how he had sustained burn injuries in presence of PW 10 (Dr. P.K. Pandey). The defence, on the other hand, did not examine any witness, but got proved the death certificate (Exhibit A) of Brajesh Kumar, through PW 7 in the cross-examination. 6. On consideration of the evidence and materials on record and mainly relying on the testimony of PWs 1 to 4, on the oral dying declaration made by Brajesh Kumar, the injured son of the accused, who subsequently died, his dying declaration recorded by the Doctor (PW 9), the circumstances that the room in which the deceased Surti Devi was found burnt to death and Brajesh Kumar, the son of the appellant, was found crying with severe burn wounds, was locked from out side, the accused/appellant was found absent from the house and had absconded until he surrendered in the Court on 6.6.1990 after submission of charge-sheet, the learned trial Court held the appellant guilty of the offences under Sections 302 and 304 of the Indian Penal Code and convicted and sentenced him, as stated above. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant has assailed the impugned convictions mainly on the grounds that there is no direct evidence that the appellant had set fire to his own house, nor any prosecution witness claims to have actually seen the appellant present at the place of occurrence or fleeing from the scene of occurrence; that no motive has been established by cogent evidence by the prosecution for the alleged offences, described to him and no reliance could be placed on the oral dying declaration made by Brajesh Kumar before PWs 1 to 4 or his brief dying declaration recorded by the Doctor (PW 9). He further submitted that the probability, in the circumstances of the case, is that his wife and son might have sustained burn wounds in the accidental fire while his wife was cooking food. The learned APP appearing on behalf of the State, on the other hand, has supported the impugned judgment. 8. The point which now falls for consideration is whether the impugned convictions are liable to be sustained. 9. It is not in dispute that the house of the appellant was ablaze on 19.4.1990 at about 1.30 p.m. and one of its room was extensively burnt. PW 2 (the informant), PW 3, the next door neighbour and PW 4 have testified to the effect that when the house of the accused/appellant was in flames, they and other villagers had rushed and they took co-operated/ participated in extinguishing the fire. In the evidence of PWs 3 and 4, it has come that the door of the room, which was ablaze, was latched from outside. PWs 2, 3 and 4 have testified to the effect that they and the other villagers broke open the door and went into the room. The Investigating Officer (PW 7) had found that the door of the room had the removed. PWs 3 and 4 have testified to the effect in their chief-examination that Brajesh Kumar, the ten-year-old son of the accused/appellant, who was writhing with pain with severe burn wound and he had stated before them that his father had killed his mother and burnt her to death; that he had set fire to the house and he too had sustained wounds by the fire. PW 3 has further stated that Brajesh Kumar had stated on the spot itself that his father had fled away after setting fire to the house and uttered "CHACHA BACHAO BACHAO" (Save-Save). PW 2 has deposed that the roof of the burning room was pulled down at the time of extinguishing the fire and he saw the women carrying injured Brajesh Kumar to the house of Ganga Das (PW 3), where he went and found that he had severe burn wounds and was crying that his father had set fire to the house and had burnt him and his mother. PW 3 has further stated that he had carried the injured Brajesh Kumar to the clinic of Dr. PW 3 has further stated that he had carried the injured Brajesh Kumar to the clinic of Dr. J.N. Prasad (PW 1), which was open, who applied ointment on the wounds and advised to take him to a big hospital, whereafter he brought him to Bokaro General Hospital and got him admitted into the casualty ward. PW 1 Dr. J.N. Prasad, a private practitioner, who has a clinic in Jhopri colony, has testified to the effect that on 19.4.1990 at about 2.00 p.m., PW 2 had brought Brajesh Kumar, the son of the accused/appellant who had burn wounds in both his hands, feet and face, and he had administered first-aid to him and advised to shift him to Bokaro Hospital. He has further stated that Brajesh Kumar and his mother were known to him as they used to visit him for treatment and on enquiry, made by him, Brajesh Kumar had disclosed that his father had burnt his mother to death and he thrown him into the burning house and further that his father had set the house on fire. PWs 2, 3 and 4 have stated that when they went inside the room they found that the wife of the deceased had been burnt to death. 10. PW 8 (Dr. S.P. Sinha) has testified to the effect that on 20.4.1990 at 12.50 p.m. he performed post-mortem examination on the corpse of deceased (Surti Devi), which had deep and extensive burn injuries all over the body and the body was almost completely charred. There was one ante-mortem lacerated wound 2-1/2" x 6" x bone deep on posterior part of the skull with ec-chymosis of subcutaneous tissues and haemorrhage, which was caused by some hard and blunt substance and the cause of death was extensive burns, which were sufficient in ordinary course of nature to cause death, and the time elapsed since death was about 24 hours of the post-mortem examination. The details of burn wounds are set out in his evidence. It is not necessary to reproduce it in detail. Exhibit 7 is the post-mortem examination report in his pen. The medical evidence fits in with the prosecution case regarding the probable time of the occurrence and the cause of death. The details of burn wounds are set out in his evidence. It is not necessary to reproduce it in detail. Exhibit 7 is the post-mortem examination report in his pen. The medical evidence fits in with the prosecution case regarding the probable time of the occurrence and the cause of death. It may be that she might have sustained the ante mortem lacerated wounds by fall of debris when the roof was pulled down to extricate the trapped victims or as the result of assault by the appellant. The fact that she met with homicidal death due to burn wounds is not disputed by the defence. 11. In spite of searching cross-examination, PWs 1, 2, 3 and 4 are consistent in their evidence that Brajesh Kumar the injured had made the oral dying declaration before them that the appellant had set fire to the house, he had killed and burnt his wife and had caused burn wounds to him as well. PWs 1, 2 and 3 and 4 are independent witnesses. There is no material on record to suggest that they have any animus with the appellant. PWs 2, 3 and 4 have denied the defence suggestion that there was accidental fire and the appellant had suffered wounds in trying to extinguish the fire. The PWs he on the other hand, have stated that they did not see the appellant on the scene of the occurrence. The defence has laid no evidence to show that he had suffered any burn in the incident. It has been noticed above that the door of the room, which was in flames, had been bolted from outside with the result that the victims trapped inside, could not escape. These circumstances lend assurance to the oral dying declaration of Brajesh Kumar, ten-year-old son of the accused/appellant, that the appellant was instrumental in causing the death of his mother by burns and leaving him to suffer the burn wounds which, ultimately, proved fatal and he too had died in the hospital, while undergoing treatment on 28.4.1990 (vide Exhibit A). It is true that the post-mortem examination report of deceased Brajesh Kumar has not been brought on record. But, the fact remains undisputed that he subsequently succumbed to the burn wounds suffered by him in the incident. It is true that the post-mortem examination report of deceased Brajesh Kumar has not been brought on record. But, the fact remains undisputed that he subsequently succumbed to the burn wounds suffered by him in the incident. The oral dying declaration made by Brajesh Kumar before PWs 1 to 4, while he was suffering from severe burn wounds is truthful and reliable. It was made by him at the earliest possible occasion and finds mentioned in the fardbeyan (Exhibit 2) itself. It does not stand to reason as to why Brajesh Kumar being the son of the appellant would falsely implicate the appellant. There is yet another dying declaration of Brajesh Kumar, which was recorded by the Doctor (PW 9). PW 2 has testified to the effect that on the advice of PW 1 he had brought Brajesh Kumar to Bokaro General Hospital and got him admitted into the casualty ward. PW 9 (Dr. Ravi Shankar) has testified to the effect that on 19.4.1990 at about 2.20 p.m. he was on duty in the casualty ward of Bokaro General Hospital, when PW 1 had brought Brajesh Kumar, who had burn wounds and on inquiry made by him in presence of Dr. P.K. Pandey (PW 10), who too was then on duty in the casualty ward, injured Brajesh Kumar stated that the burn wounds suffered by him were inflicted by his father and he recorded his statement in Hindi in verbatim but he could not obtain his signature or thumb-impression on his statement (Exhibit 6) as there were burn wounds on both his hands. PW 10 has corroborated the testimony of PW 9. Examination of the dying declaration (Exhibit 6) shows that when PW 9 had enquired from Brajesh Kumar as to how he sustained burn injuries, he replied in Hindi, which runs thus : "PITAJEE JALA DIYE" PW 10 has put his signature on it as a witness. When Brajesh Kumar was in severe pain due to the burn wounds, his natural impulse would be to tell without details the name of the person who had caused the burn wounds to him. The very brevity of the dying declaration, in the circumstances, is an index of its being true, free from suspicion and without any trace of tutoring. It does not stand to reason why PWs 9 and 10 would make a false statement before the Court. The very brevity of the dying declaration, in the circumstances, is an index of its being true, free from suspicion and without any trace of tutoring. It does not stand to reason why PWs 9 and 10 would make a false statement before the Court. In the circumstances of the case, the dying declaration of Brajesh Kumar, the injured, before the Doctor is a valuable and reliable piece of evidence. It is worthwhile to mention here that the Investigating Officer (PW 7) on more than one occasion had visited the burn unit of Bokaro General Hospital to record the statement of Brajesh Kumar, but he could not take his statement since he was not in a condition to make any statement. It has come in the evidence of PWs 3 and 4 that there used to be quarrel between the appellant and his wife and he used to beat her. This indicates that the relation between the appellant and his wife was not very cordial. Much has been argued that no motive has been proved by cogent evidence for the murder of the wife and causing fatal wounds to the son by the appellant. It is suffice to say that mysterious is the working of the human wind and the motive may be known to the assassin(s) and noneelse, not even the victim(s). 12 There is yet another striking circumstance in the case and it is the absence of any explanation by the appellant as to what he did when the tragic incident had taken place in his house and his subsequent conduct smacks of his complicity in the crime, when he absconded after the incident, evaded apprehension and it is only on 6.6.1990 that he surrendered in the Court below on the submission of the charge-sheet in the case. 13. The oral dying declaration and the recorded dying declaration, as discussed above, have been found to be true, voluntary and free from doubt. It is well-settled that conviction can be found solely on the basis of dying declaration (s), if it is found to be trustworthy and without corroboration. In the instant case, the dying declarations get support/corroboration from the circumstantial evidence, which has been discussed above. 14. In view of the discussions made above, I am of the considered view that the appellant has been rightly convicted and sentenced by the trial Court for the offences, mentioned above. In the instant case, the dying declarations get support/corroboration from the circumstantial evidence, which has been discussed above. 14. In view of the discussions made above, I am of the considered view that the appellant has been rightly convicted and sentenced by the trial Court for the offences, mentioned above. 15. In the result, this appeal is dismissed. The judgment and orders of conviction and sentence passed on the appellant by the trial Court are affirmed. P.K.Deb, J. 16 I agree.