JUDGMENT 1. All the appellants on being tried, have been found and held guilty for the offence under Section 304-B/34 of the Indian Penal Code by common judgment dated 8.8.2001 and 10.8.2001 respectively passed by the Sessions Judge, Deoghar in Sessions Trial No. 158 of 1999 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life each. As all the appeals arise out of the same judgment, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. 2. The factual matrix leading to their conviction are that Basanti Devi, sister of informant Bachoo Sao (PW 14) was married with Kaleshwar Mandal. son of appellants Panchanan Mandal and Malti Devi and brother of appellants Falo Mandal and Daso Mandal, about five years before the occurrence. According to the informant, on 12th of August. 1998, he was informed that his sister Basanti Devi has received burn injuries and admitted in Sadar Hospital, Giridih for treatment. The informant along with other members of his family arrived at Sadar Hospital. Giridih in the evening to find his sister lying senseless on bed having been completely burnt. Further stated that on next day. 13.8.1998 at about 11.00 a.m., the deceased came to sense and on query she informed him that in the night of 11.8.1998. when she was preparing food, appellant Panchanan Mandal and his wife appellant Malti Devi as well as other appellants arrived in the kitchen. She further stated that appellant Panchanan Mandal emptied a container of having five liters of kerosene oil on her head and appellant Malti Devi put her on fire with burning wood from the hearth. She tried to come out from the kitchen, but other appellants Falo Mandal and Daso Mandal forced her to remain inside with dagger and slick. According to the deceased, all the appellants thereafter confined her and saw her being burnt. She has further stated that her husband Kaleshwar Mandal was not present at that time. 3. According to the informant, this has happened because they could not satisfy the demands of the appellants for a cow and ring demanded as dowry continuously. He further asserted that the statement of the deceased was recorded by A.S.I. of Giridih Sadar Police Station in his presence. However, the sister of the informant died in the morning of 14.8.1998. 4. According to the informant, this has happened because they could not satisfy the demands of the appellants for a cow and ring demanded as dowry continuously. He further asserted that the statement of the deceased was recorded by A.S.I. of Giridih Sadar Police Station in his presence. However, the sister of the informant died in the morning of 14.8.1998. 4. The informant got his statement recorded at 9.30 a.m. on 14.8.1998 by A.S.I. Chhathu Kumar Gupta and the same was forwarded to Madhupur Police wherein Madhupur Police Station Case No. 160 dated 16.8.1998 under Section 304-B/34 of the Indian Penal Code was instituted. The police investigated the case and finally submitted charge-sheet against the five persons including the husband of the deceased. Their cases were committed to the Court of Sessions for trial. The learned Sessions Judge framed charge against all the five charge-sheeted accused persons under Section 304-B/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellants pleaded not guilty and asserted that Basanti Devi has received burn injuries due to accidental fire while cooking. However, the defence plea was not accepted and the trial Court while acquitting the husband of the deceased, Kaleshwar Mandal. found and held all these appellants guilty under Section 304-B/34 of the Indian Penal Code and accordingly, sentenced to serve rigorous imprisonment for life. 5. These present appeals have been preferred on the grounds that the learned trial Court has not considered the contradictions available in the prosecution case. It is also asserted that there was no eye-witness of the occurrence, rather, all the probable witnesses PW 1, PW 2, PW 3, PW 4, PW 5, PW 7 and PW 11 having been declared hostile, adverse inference should have been drawn against the prosecution. It is also asserted that in absence of any positive evidence, relying upon the statement of interested witnesses. PW 12, PW 13 and PW 14, particularly, in absence of doctor, who conducted the post-mortem examination, the conviction is liable to be set aside. It is also asserted that the learned trial Court has wrongly relied upon the alleged statement of the deceased treating it as dying declaration without ascertaining whether she was in a position to make statement or not. Therefore, the conviction of the appellants deserves to be set aside. Mr. Subodh Kumar Jha. Learned Counsel for the appellants stressed these points before us. 6. Therefore, the conviction of the appellants deserves to be set aside. Mr. Subodh Kumar Jha. Learned Counsel for the appellants stressed these points before us. 6. The learned APP for the State opposed these contentions and submits that in the facts of the case, the prosecution has been able to prove the charges levelled against the appellants. 7. We have anxiously considered the points stressed before us along with the materials on record. The defence has not disputed that Basanti Devi was married with Kaleshwar Mandal and she died with 100% burn injuries within seven years of her marriage. PW 16 has formally proved the post-mortem report marked Ext. 7 mentioning that the death was caused due to burn injuries. The witnesses i.e. PW 1, PW 2, PW 3, PW 4, PW 5, PW 7 and PW 11 bring co-villagers of the appellants, they supported the defence version that on 1 1.8.1998 they heard hulla from the house of the appellants. They have further asserted that they arrived at the house of the appellants to find Basanti Devi in the burning condition. This fact that Basanti Devi has received burn injuries in the night of 11.8.1998 stands supported by all of them. However, these witnesses thereafter asserted that the deceased herself informed that she caught fire in her saree during cooking. Learned Counsel for the appellants has stressed this point that the burn was not caused by the appellants, rather, it happened accidentally while she was cooking. These witnesses are admittedly not the house inmates and co-villagers. It is also undisputed fact that a "Bahu" in villages normally do not talk with outsiders. According to these witnesses, when they arrived at the place of occurrence, they made query from the deceased herself as to how she caught fire and then she explained to them while she was cooking, the fire engulfed her saree. In our opinion, these are afterthought explanations extracted from these witnesses by the appellants. Our views stand confirmed with the statement of the Investigating Officer of this case as PW 9 wherein these contradictions were brought to his attention vide Paras 5 to 9. He specifically mentions that PW 1, PW 2, PW 4, PW 5, PW 7 has stated before him that the deceased had disclosed to them that she was burnt by these appellants after sprinkling kerosene oil on her body. He specifically mentions that PW 1, PW 2, PW 4, PW 5, PW 7 has stated before him that the deceased had disclosed to them that she was burnt by these appellants after sprinkling kerosene oil on her body. He has further proved the last statement of deceased recorded by Chandeshwar Pas-wan. ASI of Town Police Station, Giridih as Ext. 4. on which PW 14 has also signed. This witness has asserted vide para 2 that when he visited the place of occurrence, he found burnt wood, clothes and one empty container of kerosene oil, seized by him vide seizure list (Ext. 3). Therefore, the plea taken by the learned Counsel for the appellants that probable witnesses have disputed the prosecution story cannot be accepted. 8. PW 6, PW 8 and PW 10 have been tendered by the prosecution. PW 12 Gulab Sao has supported the prosecution case and asserted that the deceased has disclosed these facts before police on 13.8.1998. PW 13, the mother of the deceased has also supported this version when she stated that the deceased has given the details of the occurrence. PW 14, the informant, specifically asserted in his examination-in-chief that due to non-fulfillment of dowry demands of a cow and golden ring, this incident took place. He further staled that the deceased used to complain regarding ill-treatment committed by these appellants against her. He further asserted that the deceased made statement before A.S.I. Giridih Sadar Police Station, on the basis of which he has given the details of the occurrence. His fardbeyan has been proved as Ext. 6. PW 15 has recorded the statement of the informant in Giridih Hospital and forwarded the same for registration of the case to Madhupur Police Station. PW 16 has formally proved the post-mortem report (Ext.7). The post-mortem report mentions the presence of burn injuries over whole of her body including hairs. According to post-mortem report, extensive burn injuries caused by flames has resulted in her death. 9. Therefore, the case that Basanti Devi died with burn injuries remains undisputed. The defence has taken plea that she received injuries during cooking and they have tried to bring this fact on record during their statements under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. They have denied that they ever demanded cow or golden ring. 9. Therefore, the case that Basanti Devi died with burn injuries remains undisputed. The defence has taken plea that she received injuries during cooking and they have tried to bring this fact on record during their statements under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. They have denied that they ever demanded cow or golden ring. Appellant Malti Devi has asserted that the marriage took place ten years before the occurrence denying the allegations as disclosed in the last statement of the deceased. Learned Counsel for the appellants has stressed before us that the said last statement of Basanti Devi has not been proved to be recorded by ASI Chandeshwar Paswan and further that she was in a condition to make such statement. Learned APP for the State disputed this on the grounds that this statement was recorded in presence of PW 14, brother of the deceased and proved as Ext. 4. Learned APP further pointed out that defence, while cross-examining PW 12, PW 13 and PW 14 in whose presence the statement was made, has not cross-examined them on this point that Basanti Devi was not in a condition to depose at that time. The Investigating Officer of this case has brought this statement on record and got it marked as Ext. 4. He has not been questioned in this aspect. Therefore, this point that Basanti Devi was not in a position to make statements has not been raised by the defence-during the trial. Undisputedly, Basanti Devi has died in the morning of 14.8.1998 and the statement vide Ext. 4 was recorded at 12.00 hours on 13.8. 1998 in Sadar Hospital. Giridih in presence of witnesses and PW 14. These facts have been discussed by the trial Court vide paragraph Nos. 20 and 21 of the impugned judgment. 10. We do not find any material on record to disagree with the findings of the learned trial Court on this point. It is also undisputed fact on record that the statement vide Ext. 4 was the last statement of the deceased explaining the circumstances leading to her death. Such statements are normally given the due credence under Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act because at the fag end of life, no one would like to state falsely. It is also undisputed fact on record that the statement vide Ext. 4 was the last statement of the deceased explaining the circumstances leading to her death. Such statements are normally given the due credence under Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act because at the fag end of life, no one would like to state falsely. This fact is also apparent from the records that in spite of the fact that her husband did not treat her properly, she has not named him as one of the participants in the alleged crime. The seizure of the empty kerosene oil tin along with burnt firewood and clothes seized by PW 9 from the place of occurrence after four days further supported her last statement. We also find in suggested accidental fire then such extensive burn injuries on the deceased could not be possible, particularly, when all the house inmates and hostile witnesses having arrived at the place of occurrence immediately and tried to extinguish the fire. No witness has said including the appellants that they tried to extinguish the fire by covering the deceased with blanket or putting water on her. If any such attempt was made the presence of water and mud as well as partly extinguished burnt woods have been available at the place of occurrence. Contrary to it, an empty kerosene oil tin was found at the place of occurrence. These circumstances lead convincing support to the prosecution version disclosed by the deceased Basanti Devi to PW 14 and later on recorded by a police official vide Ext. 4. Having considered all these facts and circumstances. we are of the view that the prosecution has been able to prove the charge against the appellants beyond all reasonable doubts. 11. In the result, we find and hold that the present appeal is without merit. The conviction of the appellants and sentence passed against them are hereby confirmed. Accordingly, these appeals are dismissed. Appeal dismissed.