JUDGMENT H. Baruah, J. 1. Appellant was tried by the Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Hojai, Sankardev Nagar under the charges under Sections 341 and 302, IPC, for restraining Basiruddin since deceased while was returning from shop and for causing death of said Basiruddin on 4th day of September 2001 at about 7.30 a.m. at Pub-Jamunagaon within the territorial jurisdiction of Morajhar police station under Hojai Sub-division. After due trial, appellant was found guilty under Section 302, IPC. However, he (appellant) was not found guilty under the charge under Section 341, IPC, on account of lack of evidence. The ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge having found the appellant guilty under Section 302, IPC, convicted and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for life and with fine of Rs. 2,000, in default, rigorous imprisonment for another 1 (one) year. The appellant, feeling aggrieved thereby, preferred this appeal challenging legality and correctness of the judgment of conviction rendered by the trial court. 2. The facts divulged, in brief, can be summarized as under. Informant Md. Nuruddin is the brother of Md. Basiruddin (since deceased). Appellant Ataur Rahman alias Botol is a co-villager of the informant. On 4th day of September, 2001 at about 7 a.m. while Md. Basiruddin (since deceased) was returning home from Alauddin's shop, appellant Ataur Rahman alias Botol and another together accosted him and caused grievous injuries on the person of Md. Basiruddin by means of dao and some other sharp cutting weapon and left the place leaving Basiruddin at the place of occurrence. Injured Basiruddin was removed to Hojai for treatment but before reaching hospital, on way, the died. Narrating the facts Md. Nuruddin, brother of deceased Basiruddin filed an FIR (Ext. 2) with the officer-in-charge of Morajhar police station on the same date at about 10.25 a.m. Morajhar P.S. Case No. 126 of 2001 under Section 341/302/34, IPC was registered. After due investigation a charge sheet was laid against the present appellant under Sections 341/302, IPC. The case being exclusively triable by the Court, on Sessions it was accordingly committed to the Court of Sessions at Nagaon, which was subsequently made over to Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Hojai Sankordev Nagar for trial. Thereafter, the learned Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Hojai, Sankardev Nagar on 28.2.2003 framed charges against the appellant under Sections 341 and 302, IPC. He (the appellant) having not pleaded guilty, trial proceeded. Thereafter, the learned Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Hojai, Sankardev Nagar on 28.2.2003 framed charges against the appellant under Sections 341 and 302, IPC. He (the appellant) having not pleaded guilty, trial proceeded. Altogether 18 witnesses were examined including the doctor, the Investigating Officers and another police officer who conducted inquest on the dead body of Basiruddin. Prosecution also proved the seizure memos marked as Ext. 1 and Ext. 3. At the conclusion of the trial, the trial court did find the appellant guilty of the charge under Section 302, IPC and convicted him as above. Appellant was, however, not found guilty under Section 341, IPC and accordingly acquitted. 3. Mr. A.M. Bora, learned Counsel for the appellant as well as Mr. Z. Kamar, learned P.P., appearing for the State respondent were heard at length. 4. We, at the very out set record our deep appreciation, the manner in which Mr. Bora dealt with the appeal. Mr. Bora while submitting unhesitatingly conceded that the appeal is devoid of merit since there are overwhelming evidence against the appellant showing his complicity in the commission of the alleged crime. Availability of such evidence, according to Mr. Bora perhaps, cannot absolve the appellant from the charge under Section 302, IPC. Mr. Bora, further submitted that there are eye witnesses to the actual occurrence and dying declaration which when coupled together only points towards the appellant and appellant alone that it was he., who caused the death of Basiruddin by dealing multiple fatal blows on him (Basiruddin) with the help of dao. Mr. Bora in this context referred to the evidence of Md. Surag Ali (PW6), Fatarun Nessa (PW7), Md. Habibur Rahman (PW9), Md. Samjid Ali (PW10), Md. Rahimuddin (PW13) and Md. Badan Chandra Kataty (PW15), the doctor. Evidence of these witnesses, if conjointly read results only the complicity of the appellant and the appellant alone. Evidence of remaining witnesses per submission of Mr. M. Bora, do not play pivotal role in the assessment of guilt of the appellant. Mr. Latibur Rahman (PW1) and Afia Begum (PW4), the wife of the appellant turned hostile to the prosecution. Md. Yakub Ali (PW2) and Smt. Alfatunessa (PW3) were not the eye witnesses to the actual occurrence. They heard about the death of Basiruddin from others. M. Bora, do not play pivotal role in the assessment of guilt of the appellant. Mr. Latibur Rahman (PW1) and Afia Begum (PW4), the wife of the appellant turned hostile to the prosecution. Md. Yakub Ali (PW2) and Smt. Alfatunessa (PW3) were not the eye witnesses to the actual occurrence. They heard about the death of Basiruddin from others. The above submission of Sri Bora, has perhaps rendered a spacious room to us to give a decision on this appeal without much strain in our mind. Despite that, we like to scan the evidence to see whether the appellant can be held guilty of the charge under Section 302, IPC. At this, it would also be appropriate to refer to the submission advanced by Mr. Z. Kamar, learned Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. Mr. Kamar while arguing submitted that the overwhelming evidence appearing in the face of the record only points to the guilt of the appellant and appellant alone. He too appreciated the submission of Mr. Bora, the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant. 5. Md. Surag Ali (PW6) and Fatarun Nessa (PW7) both claimed to have witnessed the occurrence. PW6 unequivocally stated that while he was proceeding to forest for collection of firewood saw accused appellant inflicting dao blows on Basiruddin. He saw another man standing near by. He rushed to the place of occurrence but accused appellant fled away therefrom along with the man who was standing nearby. He raised hue and cry having found Basiruddin in injured condition. People gathered thereat Basiruddin was taken to hospital in a push-cart. Samjid and others accompanied Basiruddin. Later, he came to know that the Basiruddin died on way to hospital. Fatarun Nessa (PW7) also stated that she saw appellant hacking Basiruddin with a dao in the field near the road. She also saw a stranger, a little away, from Botol. By cross-examination of both the witnesses, defence failed to elicit any material particular which could have rebutted their evidence-in-chief. Evidence of both the witnesses, therefore, stood firm in the context of assault on Bassiruddin by appellant Ataur Rahaman alias Botol with a dao. From scrutiny of the evidence of both the witnesses, we too fail to locate any infirmity which could have radiate a shadow of doubt in our mind in the context of assault of Basiruddin by the appellant. 6. Md. From scrutiny of the evidence of both the witnesses, we too fail to locate any infirmity which could have radiate a shadow of doubt in our mind in the context of assault of Basiruddin by the appellant. 6. Md. Habibur Rahman (PW9) stated that deceased Basiruddin was his paternal uncle. The occurrence took place at about 7.30 a.m. on 4.9.2001 and at that time he was at his own residence. He heard that appellant Botol injured his paternal uncle in front of his house. He went to the place of occurrence riding on a bicycle but did not find his uncle thereat. He heard that his uncle was taken to hospital. He accordingly had been to Rowarpar and saw his uncle Basiruddin boarding a taxi. He found Rahimuddin thereat. He further deposed that when Rahimuddin asked Basiruddin as to who had caused injury to him (Basiruddin) answer come it was accused appellant Botol, Abdul Sobhan and a stranger. On way to hospital Bassiruddin died. Md. Samjid Ali (PW10) and Md. Rahimuddin (PW13) also stated that while deceased Bassiruddin was taken to hospital, he (Bassiruddin) stated to them that appellant Ataur Rahman alias Botol did cause injury to him with a dao. So from the testimony of PW9, PW10 and PW13, we find that deceased Basiruddin before his death divulged the name of the assailant as Ataur Rahaman alias Botol. Evidence of PW9, PW10 and PW13, if clubbed together, would lend support to the evidence of PW6 and PW7. Thus, a composite reading of the evidence of PW6 and PW7, PW9, PW10 and PW13 would undoubtedly points out the involvement of the appellant Ataur Rahman alias Botol in the assault on deceased Basiruddin with a dao. At this stage we may refer that there is no evidence on record to show that the person (s) who were seen standing nearby the appellant while resorting to assault on Basiruddin, did not resort to any overt act in the assault on Basiruddin by the appellant. 7. It is in the evidence on record that deceased Basiruddin died as a result of sustention of multiple injuries in his person. Dr. Badan Ch. Kakati (PW15), who conducted autopsy on the dead body of Basiruddin discovered the following injuries:- 1. 3 Nos. of cut injuries (sharp cutting) on the rt. deltoid region 3" x 1" x bone deep. 2. It is in the evidence on record that deceased Basiruddin died as a result of sustention of multiple injuries in his person. Dr. Badan Ch. Kakati (PW15), who conducted autopsy on the dead body of Basiruddin discovered the following injuries:- 1. 3 Nos. of cut injuries (sharp cutting) on the rt. deltoid region 3" x 1" x bone deep. 2. Sharp cutting injuries on the cleft between 4th-5th finger left side. 1" x 1/2" x deep into muscles. 3. Sharp cutting injury on the scalp on the following sites and shapes. (a) Right temporal region. (b) Left temporal region, c. nape of neck All are 3" x 1" x bone deep. 4. Sharp cutting injuries on the (a) Left Forearm 2" x 1" x bone deep dorsal aspect. (b) On the left little finger is almost encised except a thin flap of skin attached. 5. Sharp cutting injuries lateral aspect of right leg lower 1/3 of 4" x 11/2" x bone deep. 6. Stab wound on the left eliac fossa 3" x 21/2 x deep into peritoneal cavils with small intestinal coils came out. Doctor opined that death was due to shock and haemorrhage as a result of cumulative effect of multiple grievous injuries sustained by the deceased. He also stated further that all the injuries were cumulatively sufficient to cause death of the deceased. He further opined that injuries 3(a) and 3(b) are cumulatively and independently sufficient to cause death of the deceased in ordinary course of nature. All the injuries according to him were ante mortem in nature. 8. From the evidence of doctor we find that injuries were mostly sharp cutting situated at vital parts. There was also a stab wound on the left eliac fossa 3" x 21/2" x deep into peritoneal cavity with small intestinal coils came out. Both PW6 and PW7 saw appellant hacking Basiruddin with a dao. This goes to show that appellant died due to dao blows inflicted several times. PW15 discovered altogether 8 numbers of sharp cut injuries and one stab injury on the dead body of Basiruddin. Defence by cross-examination failed to elicit any substantial materials which could have rebutted the evidence on record as to the discovery of the injuries on the dead body of the deceased and also as regards to the opinion as to the cause of death. Defence by cross-examination failed to elicit any substantial materials which could have rebutted the evidence on record as to the discovery of the injuries on the dead body of the deceased and also as regards to the opinion as to the cause of death. This being the position, the evidence of PW15 remain un-assailed in any material particulars. We, hereinabove also referred to the totality of the evidence of PW6 and PW7 in the context of assault by the appellant on the deceased with the help of a Dao. Since PW15, the doctor who conducted autopsy on the body of the deceased discovered multiple injuries, it lends support to the evidence of PW6 and PW7 that they witnessed appellant hacking deceased Basiruddin with Dao several times. PW15 also opined that death was due to shock and hemorrhage as a result of cumulative effects of multiple grievous injuries sustained by the deceased. So, there appears total corroboration in the context of dealing of dao blows on the deceased as well as receipt of injuries in between the evidence of PW6, PW7 and PW15. 9. PW16 is Md. Joynal Abedin, a business man of the locality. His evidence goes to show that when he appeared at the thana seeing a good number of people thereat, he saw appellant under handcuff. Later he heard that the appellant had killed Basir. This witness was not cross-examined in view of his evidence by the defence. 10. PW17 and PW18 are both police officers engaged in the investigation of the case at various stages. PW17 while disposing before the trial court stated that appellant surrendered at Morajhar police station on 8.2.2002 with Naga dao in his hand and divulged that he killed Basiruddin by means of the said dao. He further stated that he seized said Naga clao in presence of witnesses vide seizure memo Ext. 3 which was exhibited as material Ext. B during the trial. The fact that Naga dao had been seized by him from the possession of the appellant has been proved by this witness. Surrender of the appellant at Morajhar police station with a Naga dao in hand and it's seizure by PW17 together infer that said material Ext. B was used by the appellant while hacking the deceased. 11. The fact that Naga dao had been seized by him from the possession of the appellant has been proved by this witness. Surrender of the appellant at Morajhar police station with a Naga dao in hand and it's seizure by PW17 together infer that said material Ext. B was used by the appellant while hacking the deceased. 11. The evidence on record as discussed herein before, if marshaled carefully would go to show that it was appellant and appellant alone who did inflict injuries on the person of Basiruddin, the deceased with the help of a dao. From the evidence of PW6 and PW7 we find that they were eye witness to the actual occurrence. Both in unequivocal terms stated that they saw appellant hacking Basiruddin with dao. The fact of assault had also been divulged by the deceased himself before his death to PW9, PW10 and PW13. Thus, there appears a total corroboration in between the testimony of the witnesses namely PW6, PW7, PW9, PW10 and PW13. Thus, complicity of the appellant cannot be doubted in view of the evidence on record that the persons who were seen standing near by the appellant while resorting to assault on Basiruddin, did not resort to any overt act in the assault on Basiruddin by the appellant. 12. It is true that the deceased succumbed to the injuries while on way to hospital. Evidence of PW9, PW10 and PW13 would reveal that deceased while on way to hospital reveal the name of the assailant as the appellant. Apparently this particular statement of the deceased that divulged to PW9, PW10 and PW13 was not recorded either by police or by a doctor since there was no scope for such recordance. Now, the question arises whether the evidence of PW9, PW10 and PW13 in regard to revelation of factum of assault on the deceased by the appellant by the deceased himself can be regarded as dying declaration. There is no particular form to be employed in making a dying declaration, it may be oral or in writing or may even be partly oral and partly in writing. Further, it may consist of sign or gestures made by the deceased. There is no particular form to be employed in making a dying declaration, it may be oral or in writing or may even be partly oral and partly in writing. Further, it may consist of sign or gestures made by the deceased. From the records we find that there was no scope either on the part of the police or doctor or any other person responsible to record the statement of deceased Basiruddin in regard to the assault on him by the appellant. Evidence of PW9, PW10 and PW13 make it palpably clear that the deceased while on way to hospital, on query by Rahimuddin (PW13), he (deceased) divulged that the appellant caused injuries to his person with the help of a dao. Though the statement of the deceased did not find any recordance by any of the authorities, evidence of PW9, PW10 and PW13 as regards to the assailants cannot be brushed aside merely on the ground that same was not recorded. The person before whom such declaration was made were all co-villagers of the deceased, so the statement of the deceased made to PW9, PW10 and PW13 does not find any room for suspicion. Having regard to the sanctity attached to a dying declaration as it comes from the mouth of a dying person. When suspicion arises the court should naturally seek for corroboration. From the scrutiny of the evidence on record more particularly evidence of PW9, PW10 and PW13 no suspicion is found to have crept in. Therefore, the evidence of PW9, PW10 and PW13 are alone sufficient to warrant conviction of the appellant under the charge. However, evidence of PW9, PW10 and PW13 received corroboration from evidence of PW6 and PW7, the eye witnesses. Thus, the evidence of PW6 and PW7 coupled with evidence of PW9, PW10 and PW13 unerringly points to the guilt of the appellant under charge 302, IPC. 13. It is in the evidence of PW15 that he discovered multiple injuries while conducting autopsy on the dead body of the deceased numbering 9 (nine) in all caused by sharp cutting weapon as well as pointed weapon. PW6 and PW7 also stated in their evidence that they saw appellant hacking deceased by means of a dao. PW17 seized a Naga dao from the possession of the appellant vide Ext. 3 and the said Naga dao was exhibited during trial and marked as Mal. Ext. PW6 and PW7 also stated in their evidence that they saw appellant hacking deceased by means of a dao. PW17 seized a Naga dao from the possession of the appellant vide Ext. 3 and the said Naga dao was exhibited during trial and marked as Mal. Ext. B. Therefore, the manner in which the injuries were inflicted by the appellant with a dao on the deceased clearly infers an intention to cause death to the deceased. There is no evidence on record to show that the appellant resorted to a single blow on the deceased with the help of a dao. Since the appellant dealt multiple injuries to the deceased with the help of dao his intention is apparent to cause death of the deceased. 14. On an evaluation of the entire evidence on record, we are of the view that the appellant caused death of the deceased by inflicting multiple injuries with the help of a dao. The Judgment rendered by the learned Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Hojai, Sankardev Nagar thus, does not call for any interference from this Court. The judgment, order of conviction and sentence are accordingly affirmed. 15. The appeal stands dismissed. Send down the LCRs. Appeal dismissed.