Judgment AMAR BIR SINGH GILL, J. 1. Mamta appellant, aged 24 years, has in this appeal challenged judgment dated 8-1-1999 passed by Sessions Judge, Faridabad, convicting her of offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing her to life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000.00; in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months, for having committed the murder of her sister-in-law (Jethani) Aradhana by sprinkling kerosene oil and putting her on fire on 15-5-1997 who died as a result of burn injuries on 19-5-1997 in Safdarjang Hospital, Delhi. 2. The appellant was prosecuted in the trial Court on the allegations that PW5 Diwan Chand married her daughter Aradhana with Gulshan in the year 1990. She along with her parents-in-law, Dalip Bhatia, younger brother of her husband (Dever), and Mamta appellant, wife of Dalip (Devrani), was residing together in the same house. Mamta and her husband were not pulling on well with the deceased for the last one or two years earlier to the occurrence and the appellant used to harass Aradhana and her husband taunted levelling allegations of bad character against Aradhana. On 13-5-1997, Diwan Chand, her father, along with Harish and Dinesh Kumar PWs come to the house of his daughter in whose presence the appellant taunted Aradhana alleging that the deceased was of bad character and would not be allowed to stay in the house. Diwan Chand PW tried to pacify and persuade Mamta appellant to live peacefully along with Aradhana but the appellant proclaimed that she would not allow Aradhana to live in the house at any cost. On 15-5-1997, when Aradhana was working in the kitchen, her husband Gulshan along with children was in the bed room. Appellant Mamta sprinkled kerosene oil on Aradhana while in the kitchen and also set her on fire, whereafter her husband Gulshan brought her to Escort Hospital, Faridabad, but she was referred for further treatment to Safdarjang Hospital, Delhi. On receipt of intimation Exhibit PI from Escort Hospital, PW8 Assistant Sub Inspector Ranbir Singh, who was Incharge of Police Post Debua Colony, Police Station NIT, Faridabad, came to Escort Hospital and moved application Exhibit PJ to know the fitness of the injured to make statement but, as per endorsement Exhibit PJ/1, the doctor informed that she was already sent to Safdarjang Hospital, Delhi. He then came to Safdarjang Hospital, Delhi, and moved application Exhibit PK and she was declared fit to make statement vide opinion Exhibit PK/1. PW3 Assistant Sub Inspector Ramesh Chand contacted PW2 Sh. R. N. Sharma, Sub Divisional Magistrate, for the purpose of recording dying declaration. Sh. R. N. Sharma PW then came to Safdarjang Hospital and enquired from the doctor as to the fitness of the injured to make statement and on having satisfied that she was in fit state of mind to make statement, he recorded statement Exhibit PA of Aradhana which he read over to her and she thumb-marked the same in acceptance thereof as correct. Sh. R. N. Sharma PW then made endorsement Exhibit PA/1 on the statement of Aradhana and handed over the same to Assistant Sub-Inspector Ranbir Singh who forwarded the statement Exhibit PA with endorsement of Sh. R. N. Sharma, Sub Divisional Magistrate, to the police station on the basis of which a case under Section 307 read with Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code was registered vide First Information Report Exhibit PA/3 against the appellant and her husband Dalip. PW8 Assistant Sub Inspector Ranbir Singh then came to the place of occurrence and in the presence of Harish Kumar he prepared rough site plan Exhibit PK of the occurrence and also got the same photographed besides taking into possession broken bangles, half burnt clothes of Aradhana in a sealed parcel and also the empty bottle smelling kerosene oil vide memo Exhibit PL. The appellant was arrested on 18-5-1997, Aradhana died on 19-5-1997 in the hospital whereafter the offence against the appellant was changed to 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Assistant Sub Inspector Ranbir Singh prepared inquest report Exhibit PB/2 on the dead body of Aradhana and also forwarded request for its post mortem examination to the doctor, PW2 Dr. Alexander F. Khakha, Specialist in Forensic Medicines, Safdarjang Hospital, Delhi, performed post mortem examination on the dead body of Aradhana on 20-5-1997 and gave his report Exhibit PB wherein he gave his opinion that the cause of death of Aradhana was due to septicemia caused by ante mortem thermal burn injuries. Alexander F. Khakha, Specialist in Forensic Medicines, Safdarjang Hospital, Delhi, performed post mortem examination on the dead body of Aradhana on 20-5-1997 and gave his report Exhibit PB wherein he gave his opinion that the cause of death of Aradhana was due to septicemia caused by ante mortem thermal burn injuries. After the commitment of the appellant and her husband Dalip to the learned Sessions Judge, he considered the case of the prosecution and material before him and discharged accused Dalip vide his order dated 8-9-1997 and framed charges under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code against the appellant. 3. The conviction of the appellant is based on the evidence of material witnesses i.e. PW1 Sh. R. N. Sharma, Sub Divisional Magistrate Saraswati Vihar, Delhi, PW2 Dr. Alexander F. Khakha, PW5 Diwan Chand, father of the deceased, PW7 Dr. R. K. Srivastav, PW8 Assistant Sub Inspector Ranbir Singh, Investigating Officer, besides formal witnesses i.e. PW3 Assistant Sub Inspector Ramesh Chand, PW4 Anoj Kumar, PW6 Dinesh Kumar Photographer, and affidavits of police officials as well as report of Forensic Science Laboratory Exhibit PH were tendered in evidence. 4. In her statement under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the appellant admitted that she resided in the same house with the deceased, however, in a separate room. Besides, she denied the allegations appearing against her in the prosecution evidence and took up the following plea. "It is a false case. She had sustained burns accidentally when she was working at a gas-stove. At that time, her husband was in the house and he extinguished the fire and took her to the hospital. Information was conveyed to her relatives and she had been removed to Safdarjang Hospital by her uncle Basant Singh and her husband. I have been falsely implicated. Her father colluded with the police and has got a false case registered against me. After Aradhana was taken to EMC, her relations had surrounded her and continued influencing her. She never made any statement voluntarily. She produced defence witness Dr. Meena Yadav as DW1 who made statement on the basis of admission slip Exhibit D-1 of the deceased of Safdarjang Hospital, Delhi. 5. Learned Sessions Judge came to the conclusion that the prosecution evidence was sufficient to hold the appellant guilty of the charge of murder and, thus, convicted and sentenced her for the said offence. 6. Meena Yadav as DW1 who made statement on the basis of admission slip Exhibit D-1 of the deceased of Safdarjang Hospital, Delhi. 5. Learned Sessions Judge came to the conclusion that the prosecution evidence was sufficient to hold the appellant guilty of the charge of murder and, thus, convicted and sentenced her for the said offence. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 7. In this case, the conviction of appellant Mamta is primarily based on the testimonies of PW1 Sh. R.N. Sharma, Sub Divisional Magistrate, Saraswati Vihar, District North-West, Delhi, who recorded dying declaration Exhibit PA; PW5 Diwan Chand, father of the deceased, in support of evidence of dying declaration and motive; and report of the Forensic Science Laboratory Exhibit PH confirming the broken bangles and partially burnt clothes of the deceased recovered from the place of occurrence having residue of kerosene oil. Dying declaration Exhibit PA of Aradhana deceased was recorded by PW1 Sh. R. N. Sharma, the then Sub Divisional Magistrate, Delhi Cantt., on 16-5-1997 at 3.00 p.m. which along with his own endorsement Exhibit PA/1 read as under :- "My name is Aradhana. The name of my husband is Gulshan. I was married 7 years ago. I was cooking food yesterday evening and then my Devarani Mamta came there and sprinkled kerosene oil from a bottle and set on fire. My husband along with children was sleeping inside. My husband is driver. He does not say anything to me. He afterwards saved me. Yesterday prior to it, I had a quarrel with my Devarani. She quarrels with me every day. Several days ago, she had given beating to me with bricks. She had harassed me to a greater extent. My Dever named Dalip also taunts me. Devarani had burnt me. My Devarani always made allegation against my character. She always talked with in a bad manner and told that either I would stay in the house or she would stay in it. I am pregnant. Statement heard and found to be correct." RTI Upon it, Shri R. N. Sharma made endorsement Exhibit PA/1, as under :- "I received an information from ASI Ramesh Chand PS Sarojani Nagar regarding a burn case of Smt. Aradhana r/o Dabua Colony, Faridabad. I rushed to Safdarjang Hospital, Burn Ward and recorded the above statement in my handwriting and she gave the statement voluntarily and calmly. She is fit for statement. I rushed to Safdarjang Hospital, Burn Ward and recorded the above statement in my handwriting and she gave the statement voluntarily and calmly. She is fit for statement. It is stated that it is a case of 68% burns. Case to be registered by the concerned police station." Sd/- 16-5-1997/3.00 p.m." 8 It is settled principle of law that if dying declaration is accepted as reliable and voluntarily made in proper mental condition by the injured, the same can be relied upon by the Court even without corroboration. However, as a rule of prudence, the Court looks for its corroboration from other material on the record so as to confirm its belief in the reliability of the dying declaration. Learned counsel for the appellant has mainly assailed dying declaration Exhibit PA in this case on the ground that at the time of recording of Exhibit PA, the Sub Divisional Magistrate did not obtain written opinion of the doctor if she was fit to make statement. Secondly, it was contrary to the entry in the hospital record wherein it is mentioned that she caught fire from gas stove in the kitchen or bursting of gas cylinder and it was recorded under the influence of the parents of the deceased. In order to appreciate the plea of the learned counsel, it is to be seen that the occurrence in which Aradhana deceased got burn injuries took place at about 10.00 p.m. in her in-laws house where, admittedly, besides her family i.e. her husband and children, family of her Devar Dalip, his wife Mamta appellant and parents in-laws were residing together. She was removed immediately to Escorts Hospital after Gulshan Kumar, husband of the deceased, intimated Diwan Chand, father of the deceased. She was admitted in Escorts Hospital at 00.30 a.m. on 16-5-1997. Intimation Exhibit PI was sent to the Police Station immediately. PW8 Ranbir Singh, Assistant Sub Inspector, on receipt of information then came to the Escorts Hospital with application Exhibit PJ upon which the doctor mentioned at Exhibit PJ/1 at 00.40 a.m. on same night that the patient was referred to Safdarjang Hospital, New Delhi, PW7 Dr. R. K. Srivastav has produced the case sheet of Aradhana deceased which pertained to her admission and discharge record. It mentions the time of admission as 01.05 a.m. on 16-5-1997. It also includes emergency consultation card of Escorts Hospital. R. K. Srivastav has produced the case sheet of Aradhana deceased which pertained to her admission and discharge record. It mentions the time of admission as 01.05 a.m. on 16-5-1997. It also includes emergency consultation card of Escorts Hospital. Safdarjang Hospitals admission sheet mentions a case of burn injuries superficial, deep, blood pressure and pulse not recordable. It is also mentioned that the police was informed. The patient card of the deceased of Escort Hospital and that of Safdarjang Hospital, Exhibit P-1, does not show if the deceased was conscious at the time she was brought to the hospital, PW8 Ranbir Singh, Assistant Sub-Inspector, in order to record the statement of Aradhana, then admitted in Safdarjang Hospital, sought opinion of the doctor on his application Exhibit PK on which the doctor vide his endorsement Exhibit PK/1 declared her fit to make statement at 11.20 a.m. Thereafter, the police contacted Shri R. N. Sharma, Sub Divisional Magistrate, whose office was situated at 15-20 Kms. from the hospital and who accordingly on reaching the hospital recorded statement Exhibit PA of Aradhana at about 3.00 p.m. He made his endorsement Exhibit PA/1 on the basis of which First Information Report in this case was registered against the appellant and her husband Dalip. The statement of Sh. R. N. Sharma as PW1 would indicate that after recording statement Exhibit PA of Aradhana, he had read over the statement to her and she had thumb-marked the same in token of its correctness. Before recording statement of Aradhana, he had obtained opinion of the doctor that she was fit to make her statement. In his cross-examination, he has further clarified that he had mentioned in his endorsement that she was fit to make statement which observation was on the statement of the doctor as well as his own satisfaction because he had talked to her while recording her statement. He also gave the manner of recording dying declaration of Aradhana when he stated, "initially, I asked her name, her husbands name and what the matter was and to which place she belonged and how much period had elapsed to her marriage and when I asked what happened, then she narrated the statement. After I asked her what happened, then she uttered one sentence, then I again asked what further happened and likewise I continued that". The dying declaration is recorded in narrative form. After I asked her what happened, then she uttered one sentence, then I again asked what further happened and likewise I continued that". The dying declaration is recorded in narrative form. However, statement of PW1 Shri R. N. Sharma rules out any doubt as to fitness of Aradhana to make statement once he stated that he himself had satisfied that she was fit to make statement which was further confirmed when he talked to her while recording her statement. No doubt, Sh. R. N. Sharma did not obtain written opinion of the doctor that she was fit to make statement but the doctor had already declared her fit to make statement vide his opinion Exhibit PK/1. In cross-examination, statement of Sh. R. N. Sharma was not challenged but for, suggestion that she never made any statement or that the same was fabricated in collusion with complainant party. Such a suggestion appears to be far fetched and does not in any manner impair the value of his statement merely because he did not observe certain safeguards that he did not obtain written opinion of the doctor which at best can be an omission on his part. It does not justify to hold the view that the officer of his rank will fall prey to any such design of police or complainant party to prepare a false document of the nature of dying declaration, moreso when it is not shown in any manner if Sh. R. N. Sharma was biased against the accused or was inclined to help the complainant party. In fact, apart from suggestion, statement of PW1 Sh. R. N. Sharma was not challenged in material particulars as to the fitness of Aradhana to make statement before him. Even if at the time the Magistrate reaches the patient for recording dying declaration and for some reason or the other the doctor is not available and he himself is satisfied that the patient is in a fit state of mind to make statement, there appears to be no bar in recording dying declaration if the situation so demands. Admittedly, the burn injuries had covered almost the whole body which were deep and superficial as well as is indicated in the history sheet of the patient and the area of burn shown on the front and back side of the figure of human body with reference to the patient. Admittedly, the burn injuries had covered almost the whole body which were deep and superficial as well as is indicated in the history sheet of the patient and the area of burn shown on the front and back side of the figure of human body with reference to the patient. It was imminent, in the circumstances, for the Sub Divisional Magistrate to record the statement of Aradhana and he cannot be doubted when he stated that he enquired from the doctor if she was fit to make statement. His endorsement Exhibit PA/1, reproduced above, sufficiently certifies that Aradhana was fit to make statement when he recorded her dying declaration which was made before him by her voluntarily and calmly. In the circumstances, the genuineness of dying declaration Exhibit PA can hardly be doubted in any manner. 9. It has been urged before us that Aradhana was influenced by her relatives before she made statement. It has come in the statement of PW5 Diwan Chand that Aradhana could regain consciousness on 16-5-1997 but they were not allowed to meet her. For the first time, he came to know that she was put on fire by Mamta appellant after meeting Aradhana in Safdarjang Hospital. No doubt, he stated that he had met Aradhana earlier to recording her statement by the Sub Divisional Magistrate but no person was present near her bed when her statement was recorded. Since no information to the police was given regarding the occurrence by any one, much less by Diwan Chand PW, her father, it can safely be inferred that Diwan Chand PW or any body else did not influence or prompted her in any manner to make dying declaration. Otherwise, in view of the fact that on 13-5-1997, according to PW5 Diwan Chand, Mamta appellant had threatened and proclaimed that she will not allow Aradhana to live in the house, Diwan Chand PW could very well lodge the First Information Report accusing Mamta appellant or any of in-laws of Aradhana for the burn injuries of his daughter. It is in his statement that since midnight of 15/16-5-1997 he was present in the hospital, from her in-laws side only Gulshan, husband of Aradhana, was present and Mamta appellant and her husband had not come to the hospital at all. Nothing prevented Diwan Chand PW to accuse them for the burn injuries of his daughter. It is in his statement that since midnight of 15/16-5-1997 he was present in the hospital, from her in-laws side only Gulshan, husband of Aradhana, was present and Mamta appellant and her husband had not come to the hospital at all. Nothing prevented Diwan Chand PW to accuse them for the burn injuries of his daughter. Instances are not lacking where even after the demise and cremation of brides, the parents lodge First Information Reports accusing the in-laws of bride burning and cruel treatment on account of demand of dowry. In the instant case, however, there appears to be no effort on the part of the parents of the deceased to make a report of any kind against her in-laws till Diwan Chand PW was told by Aradhana deceased that she was put on fire after sprinkling kerosene oil on her by Mamta appellant. It was very easy for Diwan Chand PW, on receipt of information that his daughter was burnt, to lodge a report against the family members of her daughters in-laws and get them arrested in this case but he waited to know from his daughter as to what actually had happened and cause of her burn injuries. He came to know for the first time from Aradhana when he met her in the hospital on 16-5-1997 after she regained consciousness and made statement before PW1 Sh. R. N. Sharma that it was Mamta appellant who sprinkled kerosene oil on her and put fire to her body. He has categorically stated in his statement that as and when his daughter used to meet him, she used to complain of harassment by Mamta appellant and her husband Dalip and on 13-5-1997 Mamta appellant had threatened in his presence that she would not allow to stay her (Aradhana) at any cost and she was blaming Aradhana regarding her character. It was on that date that Diwan Chand PW along with his nephews Harish and Dinesh Kumar had gone to the house of in-laws of Aradhana. He tried to persuade and pacify Mamta appellant to live peacefully with Aradhana in the house. In his cross-examination, Diwan Chand PW was not challenged if Mamta appellant had not accused the deceased of bad character since there was no such contrary suggestion or question was put to him. In view of the fact that PW2 Dr. He tried to persuade and pacify Mamta appellant to live peacefully with Aradhana in the house. In his cross-examination, Diwan Chand PW was not challenged if Mamta appellant had not accused the deceased of bad character since there was no such contrary suggestion or question was put to him. In view of the fact that PW2 Dr. Alexander F. Khakha has ruled out the possibility of sustaining burn injuries from a gas flame and report of Forensic Science Laboratory that the burnt clothes and the broken pieces of bangles of the deceased had residue of kerosene oil, there is no scope to hold that Aradhana died in any other manner but for receiving burn injuries with kerosene oil flame. 10. The principle of law in respect of relying upon uncorroborated dying declaration has since been well settled. It has been observed by the Supreme Court in the case of Kanchy Komuramma V/s. State of A.P., 1996 SCC (Crl) 31 as under :- "There are certain safeguards which must be observed by a Magistrate when requested to record a dying declaration. The Magistrate before recording the dying declaration must satisfy himself that the deceased is in a proper mental state to make the statement. He must record that satisfaction before recording the dying declaration. He must also obtain the opinion of the doctor, if one is available, about the fitness of the patient to make a statement and the prosecution must prove that opinion at the trial in the manner known to law........" 11. In the case of Ganpat Mahadeo Mane V/s. State of Maharashtra, Criminal Appeal No. 254 of 1982 decided on 15-10-1992, 1993 Cri LJ 298. Supreme Court has observed as under :- "...........Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that since the Executive Magistrate did not record the statement by way of questions and answers the recording is defective and, therefore, it should not be acted upon. We see no force in this submission. The form by itself is not important. The statement is clear. Because of the mere fact that the entire thing is not recorded by way of separate questions and answers, the value of the dying declaration is not detracted..........." 12. The essence of principle of accepting dying declaration of an injured is its trustworthiness and not the form. The form by itself is not important. The statement is clear. Because of the mere fact that the entire thing is not recorded by way of separate questions and answers, the value of the dying declaration is not detracted..........." 12. The essence of principle of accepting dying declaration of an injured is its trustworthiness and not the form. Yet in another case reported as Smt. Laxmi V/s. Om Parkash, 2001 (5) JT (SC) 280 : 2001 Cri LJ 3302, the principle has been further clarified by the Supreme Court in the following manner "A dying declaration made by person on the verge of his death has a special sanctity as at that solemn moment, a person is most unlikely to make any untrue statement. The shadow of impending death is by itself the guarantee of the truth of the statement made by the deceased regarding the causes or circumstances leading to his death. A dying declaration, therefore, enjoys almost a sacrosanct status, as a piece of evidence, coming as it does from the mouth of the deceased victim. Once the statement of the dying person and the evidence of the witnesses testifying to the same passes the test of careful scrutiny of the Courts, it becomes a very important and a reliable piece of evidence and if the Court is satisfied that the dying declaration is true and free from any embellishment such a dying declaration, by itself, can be sufficient for recording conviction even without looking for any corroboration"- it is statement of law summed up by this Court in Kundula Bala Subrahmanyam V/s. State of A.P. (1993 (2) JT (SC) 559) : 1993 Cri LJ 1635." 13. Learned counsel assailed the correctness of dying declaration Exhibit PA merely on the ground that admission entries in the Escort Hospital as well as Safdarjang Hospital does not refer to receipt of burn injuries with kerosene oil and rather mention with gas stove. The entry regarding history of the case and admission slip refers to "alleged burning with gas stove or bursting of gas stove." A mere perusal of admission entry in the case sheet does not mention if the patient was conscious. If she was not conscious, it was not possible for her to make any statement regarding the manner she received burn injuries. If she was not conscious, it was not possible for her to make any statement regarding the manner she received burn injuries. The entry regarding history of case in Safdarjang Hospital record is given only in the discharge slip i.e. at the time Aradhana succumbed to her injuries. It has come in the testimony of D.W. 1 Dr. Meena Yadav that she made entry on the dictation of senior doctor whose name she does not remember. The entry, in the circumstances, is hearsay as she no where stated that the patient gave any indication as to receipt of injuries to her. Such like entry in the bed-head ticket does not carry any legal value because such entry is made either at the instance of attendant who may have heard about the incident or may have stated from his own. This entry did not carry any evidentiary value. In the case of Balak Ram V/s. State of U.P., 1974 SCC (Cri) 837 : 1974 Cri LJ 1486, where similar injured was in such a state of health, Supreme Court observed as under :- "In the instant case the statement of the Medical Officer, who had examined the deceased, shows that the deceased was in a critical condition when he reached the hospital. He was in severe pain and in a state of profound depression of vital processes of the body resulting from his injury. There was profuse bleeding from his injury, his respiration was poor, his pulse was feeble and thready and blood pressure was not recordable. In the above circumstances, the deceased cannot be said to be in a fit mental and physical condition to make a volitional statement after he had reached the hospital." 14. Supreme Court in the case of Gangotri Singh V/s. State of U.P., Criminal Appeal Nos. 412-413 of 1981 decided on 11-3-1992 : 1992 Cri LJ 1290, has held that the contents of an entry made by the Doctor in bed-head ticket at the time of admission of injured (deceased) in the hospital cannot be treated as dying declaration. Likewise, entry of alleged history of the case given in the case sheet of Aradhana deceased cannot be treated as dying declaration. 15. Likewise, entry of alleged history of the case given in the case sheet of Aradhana deceased cannot be treated as dying declaration. 15. Dying declaration Exhibit PA has unequivocally been corroborated in exact words by P.W. 5 Diwan Chand who has stated that when he met his daughter Aradhana in the hospital after she regained consciousness, she told him that Mamta appellant had sprinkled kerosene oil on her and put fire to her body. The dying declaration recorded by P.W. 1 Sh. R. N. Sharma, Sub-Divisional Magistrate, is free from any controversy and inspires confidence and it can safely be relied as trustworthy dying declaration of Aradhana deceased. 16. The prosecution case also inspires confidence as no extra effort as made to fasten guilt on Dalip, husband of appellant-Mamta, as well and his active assistance to Mamta appellant in committing the crime has not been fortified and the allegation against him remained to the extent that he also harassed Aradhana deceased. The testimony of the prosecution witnesses is without any bias against the appellant and their deposition does not suffer from any infirmity. 17. In the light of the discussion above, we confirm the finding of guilt arrived at by the trial Court against the appellant and their being no merit in the appeal, the same is dismissed.