JUDGMENT - R.K. BATTA, J.:---The appellant alongwith six others was tried for murder of his wife by burning her. They were also tried for subjecting the deceased Mangala to cruelty etc., under section 498-A of I.P.C. All the other accused were acquitted of both the charges and the appellant was also acquitted of the charge under section 498-A of I.P.C. However, the appellant was convicted for the murder of his wife Mangala under section 302 of I.P.C. and he was sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life. The appellant challenges his conviction and sentence imposed under section 302 of I.P.C. 2. The prosecution had examined 5 witnesses in support of the charge. The plea taken by the appellant is alibi and to establish the same three defence witnesses were examined. The trial Court has disbelieved the defence and found that the dying declaration was truthful, reliable and inspired confidence. 3. The learned Advocate for the appellant urged before us that it is admitted by Dr. P.W. 2 Milind that the deceased was given sedatives, and had suffered 98% burns, as a result of which it would be doubtful whether the deceased would be in a position to make any statement. He also urged that the deceased was surrounded by her relatives before her dying declaration was recorded and as such the possibility of the deceased being tutored to implicate the appellant cannot be ruled out. In addition, it is urged by him that there is no reason whatsoever to discard the defence evidence and the trial Court had erred in rejecting the defence version, when the defence witnesses withstood at the test of cross-examination and their testimony could not be shaken. At any rate, it is urged that keeping in view the evidence on record the appellant would be entitled to benefit of doubt and as such he be acquitted. 4. On the other hand it has been urged by the learned A.P.P. that the dying declaration was promptly recorded by the Executive Magistrate-P.W. 3 Chandrashekhar, after duly verifying from Doctor P.W. 2 that the deceased was in a fit condition to give statement; that P.W. 2 Milind Chokhande was throughout present during the recording of the dying declaration of the deceased by the Executive Magistrate P.W. 3 and after recording of the dying declaration also certified that patient was in fit state to give dying declaration. He also urged that in the statement recorded by the police also the deceased had directly implicated the appellant for burning her and even that statement was recorded by the P.S.I. P.W. 5 after duly verifying from the Doctor that the deceased was in a fit state to give statement. He, therefore, urged before us that the dying declaration has been recorded after complying all safeguards and there is no reason whatsoever to discard the dying declaration. He also pointed out that the other evidence on record namely the broken of the bangles and the Mangalsutra which was found at the scene of offence show that there was scuffle which further lends support to the prosecution case that the deceased was burnt. Regarding defence evidence it was urged that the trial Court has rightly discarded the defence evidence in as much as not only the plea of alibi was a matter of an after-thought, but the defence evidence did not inspire confidence so as to discard the dying declaration duly recorded by the Executive Magistrate and the Police Officer after following the necessary safeguards. He therefore, urged that there is no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment. 5. We have examined the record in the light of the rival contentions advanced before us. The prosecution case mainly rests upon the dying declaration made by the deceased and corroboration from the spot panchanama which was an admitted document. The incident in question is said to have taken place at about 8.30 a.m. The deceased was taken to the hospital at about 9.00 a.m. Doctor Milind certified at 9.15 a.m. that the patient was fully conscious and fit to give statement. The recording of the dying declaration by the Executive Magistrate P.W. 3 Chandrashekhar started at 9.30 a.m. and was concluded at 9.45 a.m. After the recording of the statement of the deceased by the Executive Magistrate, Dr. Milind once again certified that the patient was fully conscious and was fit to give statement before and after recording of the statement. Dr. Milind-P.W. 2 has categorically stated in his deposition that he was present at time of recording her statement. He has also stated that nobody else was present except himself and the Executive Magistrate. The Executive Magistrate P.W. 3 has confirmed that the dying declaration was read over and explained to the patient after which her thumb impression was obtained. Dr. Milind-P.W. 2 has categorically stated in his deposition that he was present at time of recording her statement. He has also stated that nobody else was present except himself and the Executive Magistrate. The Executive Magistrate P.W. 3 has confirmed that the dying declaration was read over and explained to the patient after which her thumb impression was obtained. He also confirms that besides him and the Doctor no one was present when the statement was recorded. He further stated that Mangala was talking in low tone, and he was in a position to understand her. She was feeling thirsty and was asking for water. He denied the suggestion that Mangala was talking irrelevant or that it was not possible for her to give statement. 6. In respect to the dying declaration the attack by the defence is on two counts namely: that on account of 98% burns and due to administration of sedatives deceased Mangala was not in a position to give statement and in this connection our attention has been drawn to that part of the statement of Dr. Milind where he states that in case of extensive burns plus administration of sedative, it becomes difficult for the patient to give a statement. Theoretically it may be so, but Dr. Milind P.W. 2 has categorically, stated that even though, Mangala was administered IV fluids and antibiotics and sedatives, yet she was in a fit state to make statement. Dr. Milind had examined the patient before recording the statement also and after the statement had been recorded by the Executive Magistrate and found that throughout the deceased was in a fit condition to give statement. Therefore, in the light of the evidence of Dr. Milind P.W. 2 and Executive Magistrate P.W. 3, we do not find any merit in the first submission advanced by the learned Advocate for the appellant. 7. Coming to the attack that the relatives were present and had tutored the deceased to make statement. There is in fact nothing on record to suggest that there was any kind of tutoring done by any one to the deceased. It is no doubt true that some relative were present with the deceased prior to the recording of her statement, but from that, by itself, it cannot be inferred that the deceased was tutored. The relatives could possibly be relatives of husband as well. It is no doubt true that some relative were present with the deceased prior to the recording of her statement, but from that, by itself, it cannot be inferred that the deceased was tutored. The relatives could possibly be relatives of husband as well. The relatives of the deceased would naturally arrive later after they were informed and there is nothing to suggest that the relatives of the deceased had any talk with the deceased prior to the recording of her dying declaration. 8. The dying declaration recorded by the Executive Magistrate also gets complete corroboration from the statement recorded by the P.S.I. P.W. 5 of the deceased after obtaining the certificate of fitness from Dr. Milind Chokhande. He recorded the statement after due certificate from Dr. Milind Chokhande that the patient was in a fit state to give statement. 9. The prosecution case further gets corroboration from spot panchanama which shows that the broken mangalsutra and the pieces of bangles were lying at the place of incident which shows the resistance and struggle put by deceased while she was being burnt. The spot panchanama also shows that kerosene was found on entire floor of the room which means that kerosene was poured on the deceased. The defence case, we must state, is not only unbelievable, but is a result of afterthought. The accused in his statement under section 313 did not even whisper that he was not present at that time of incident and that he was present at the hair cutting saloon. The D.W. 3 Shobha has stated that one Damu had broken open the door and the door was chained from inside. The defence case is falsified by spot panchanama, Exhibit 20, which shows that the front door of the said room where the incident took place had no chain from inside. The spot panchanama also does not show the breaking of any door where the incident took place. Damu who is alleged to have broken open the door was not examined by defence. D.W. 2 Sanjay had admitted in his statement that the police had came to interrogate him but he did not tell any thing to the police about the incident. Damu who is alleged to have broken open the door was not examined by defence. D.W. 2 Sanjay had admitted in his statement that the police had came to interrogate him but he did not tell any thing to the police about the incident. In case Sanjay D.W. 2 was present at the time of incident, he would have stated the facts to the police, but he had not stated the incident to the police and this witness has been introduced by the defence and his testimony cannot be relied upon. Likewise Babanrao D.W. 1 has been also introduced by defence as a chance witness. His presence at the hair cutting saloon is doubtful, as also the theory that the accused was repairing cycle outside the saloon, the trial Court had the benefit to observe the demeanour of the prosecution as well as defence witnesses and had discarded the defence evidence and in our view very rightly the defence evidence was discarded. The dying declaration does not suffer from any infirmity and we find that the dying declaration is not only truthful, but reliable as also it inspires confidence. There is therefore, no reason whatsoever to discard the dying declarations which have been recorded after following all the necessary safeguards. There is also corroboration of the dying declaration as pointed out in paras 8 and 9 above. 10. For the aforesaid reasons we do not find any merit in this appeal. The appeal is hereby dismissed. Appeal dismissed. -----