Per: Virender Singh, J. 1. Appellant- Joginder Singh (hereinafter to be referred to as `accused’) S/o Sh. Shiv Lal after having been convicted vide impugned judgment dated 03.07.2009 of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Doda for the charge of Section 302 Ranbir Penal Code is before us through Cr. Appeal No.40/2009. He has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and also to pay fine to the tune of Rs.10,000/-. However, the sentence slapped upon him is subject to confirmation of this Court. As such, Confirmation No.14/2009. 2. Mst. Goran Devi, mother of accused Joginder Singh, who was also charged alongwith him for the offences punishable under Section 302/109/498-A RPC stands acquitted by the trial Court. State has not preferred any appeal against the acquittal earned by her. Facts of the case, in brief: 3. Babli Devi, wife of accused-Joginder Singh, is the deceased in this case, who after receiving burn injuries on the night intervening 26th/27th of May, 2003 was got admitted in Govt. Hospital Doda upon an intimation sent to the police, the concerned police official through a docket approached the doctor to know, whether injured Babli Devi was in a position to make the statement. She was found to be not in that position. On 27.05.2003 itself, she was referred to GMC Jammu. PW Tara Chand Head Constable, was deputed for recording her statement. On 30.05.2003, it was recorded after obtaining the certificate of the attending doctor and sent to the Police Station Doda on 03.06.2003, upon which a formal F.I.R. No.77/2003 was initially registered under Section 307/109 RPC. The complete statement in vernacular (urdu) when translated into English version, reads as under:- "Statement of Mst. Babli Devi w/o Joginder Singh caste Bhagat resident of Thathri at present Nagri Doda, age 26 years, occupation House wife dated 30.05.2003 Stated that deponent is a resident of above mentioned address and is house wife by occupation. About four years ago, her parents got her married to Joginder Singh S/o Shiv Lal R/o Thathri. She has a daughter aged 3 years approximately. 5/6 months after her marriage, her mother-in-law Mst. Goran Devi started quarrelling with her on trifles and used to tell her husband that she is not performing her routine work and her husband also used to pick up quarrel with her and also used to beat her quite often without any reason. This continued for about three years. 5/6 months after her marriage, her mother-in-law Mst. Goran Devi started quarrelling with her on trifles and used to tell her husband that she is not performing her routine work and her husband also used to pick up quarrel with her and also used to beat her quite often without any reason. This continued for about three years. On being fed up with all this, she went to her maternal home and narrated the treatment meted out to her by her mother-in-law and the husband who used to beat her, upon which she lodged a application in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Doda seeking justice to her and with the intervention of the Court, her husband started living with her in a rented accommodation at Nagri Doda separately. Her husband started working as an employee in one STD. The attitude of her husband to her remained good till her mother-in-law and relatives started coming there. The moment her mother-in-law and relatives started visiting her place at Nagri Doda, the husband again started quarrelling and beating her. On 26th of May, 2003 she was in her rented accommodation, her husband was in the STD and she prepared the meal and waiting for the arrival of her husband. At that time, her daughter was sleeping. On his arrival at 10 p.m., he started quarrelling with her and caught hold from her neck and started giving beatings to her. He then poured kerosene oil upon her which was kept in a plastic gallon and set ablaze her person and clothes with a match stick. By the time she raised an alarm, the fire had already engulfed her and she became unconscious. On regaining the conscious, she found herself to be admitted in GMC Jammu. On being instigated by her mother-in-law, her husband has set her ablaze after pouring kerosene oil on her, as a result of which, her face, throat, both upper limbs, chest, waist and legs bears the injury marks. At this time I am being hospitalized in GMC Jammu for treatment and making the statement in full sense. This is the only statement she wants to give, the contents whereof are heard and admitted to be correct. Since the finger tips of both hands of the deponent got burnt, she is unable to put his signatures. At this time I am being hospitalized in GMC Jammu for treatment and making the statement in full sense. This is the only statement she wants to give, the contents whereof are heard and admitted to be correct. Since the finger tips of both hands of the deponent got burnt, she is unable to put his signatures. Only thumb of right hand is left unburnt, so she has put her thumb impression on the statement. Thumb impression of Sd/ Right hand of Mst. Babli Devi HC Tara Chand P/S Doda Witness Gori Lal" 4. Aforesaid PW Tara Chand Head Constable started the investigation, prepared the site plan of the place of occurrence after breaking the lock of the room in the presence of Sh. Prithvi Raj Manhas, Executive Magistrate, recovered one gallon containing about two litres of kerosene oil, some burnt hair of the injured, clothes, one match box and certain other articles. All these items were seized and sealed for sending them to Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) Jammu. Statement of certain witnesses were also recorded during the investigation. On 06.06.2003, a telephonic message was received that Babli Devi had succumbed to the injuries in GMC Jammu, upon which offence under Section 302 RPC was added. Autopsy on the dead body of the deceased was conducted by PW Dr. Manju Tikku. 5. The investigation conducted by the police revealed that 5/6 months after the marriage, Mst. Goran Devi (since acquitted) started quarrelling with the deceased. She used to beat her also by leveling allegation of infidelity and would instigate accused Joginder Singh, who also had beaten her. She was not served even with meal and her in-laws used to threaten her to death. It further revealed that the deceased came to her parents and moved a petition in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, which, ultimately ended with an understanding and thereafter accused-Joginder Singh and the deceased started residing in a rented room in the house of PW Ajit Singh. It is then alleged that Mst. Goran Devi had come to their residence before the occurrence and had instigated her son-Joginder Singh and left. It is then alleged that Mst. Goran Devi had come to their residence before the occurrence and had instigated her son-Joginder Singh and left. It is then the case of prosecution that on the date of occurrence, when deceased had raised hue & cry and came out of the room after she was set ablaze, PW Ajit Singh and his wife PW Asha Devi, who were sleeping in the adjoining room, extinguished the fire and accused-Joginder was standing at a distance mere as a spectator. She became unconscious and brought to the District Hospital, Doda. 6. After committal proceeding, accused-Joginder Singh was charged for the Section 302/498-A RPC; whereas Mst. Goran Devi (his mother) was charged for the offence under Section 302/109/498-A RPC. 7. After recording the prosecution evidence, which consists of thirteen (13) witnesses, both the accused were examined under Section 342 Cr.P.C., who denied all the allegations. Accused Joginder Singh tendered his explanation that on the date of occurrence when he came back from S.T.D. shop, the deceased started heating the meal for him on stove and he went to bathroom. When he heard her cries, he came out and saw that the deceased had caught fire from the stove. He extinguished the fire. The accused were called upon to enter in defense in which they examined three witnesses. Accused Joginder Singh also stepped into witness box under Section 342-A Cr.P.C. after moving a formal application in this regard. 8. We are once again referring to the material evidence produced by the prosecution during the trial and required to be re-appreciated by us being Court of first appeal. It is settled law that the appeal is the continuation of the trial. 9. To start with, we refer to the injuries received by the deceased as noticed by PW Dr. Manju Tikku at the time of conducting the autopsy on 06.06.2003. These are:- 1. Burns present on face. 2. Neck. 3. Front of chest. 4. Abdomen. 5. Both upper limbs, burn present on dorsal aspect of both hands, palms were spared. 6. Both lower limbs up to knee. 10. In her cross-examination, she has made it clear that Babli Devi was treated for 11 days in the hospital. However, she could not name the treating doctor. According to her, the injured had received 60% burn injuries, which were almost on the front side of the body. 6. Both lower limbs up to knee. 10. In her cross-examination, she has made it clear that Babli Devi was treated for 11 days in the hospital. However, she could not name the treating doctor. According to her, the injured had received 60% burn injuries, which were almost on the front side of the body. She further stated that it is not necessary that the person, who received 60% injuries, becomes unconscious. She was categoric in saying that in this particular case, the injured was conscious as she had seen the summary file of the deceased regarding her treatment at the time of conducting the post mortem. With regard to word `initially’ mentioned in the case-sheet filed, the victim has clarified that after receiving the burns the injured was conscious and afterwards what was her position she could not comment. She further made it clear in her cross examination that in this case, it was second kind of burns. However, she did not find any abnormality in the head and even the hair of the deceased were intact. Report given by her is exhibited as EXPW-MT. 11. We have the evidence of another doctor namely Dr. Kailash Singh, who on 30.05.2003 was a student of MS Surgery in GMC Jammu. He examined Mst. Babli Devi (since deceased) on 30.05.2003 only and found her fit to give her verbal statement vide certificate EXPW-KS. 12. In his cross-examination, this witness stated that he did not know, who was the treating doctor of the patient as the patient was not directly under his treatment. He further stated that before giving certificate, he asked certain questions to the patient, but could not explain as to what type of questions were asked by him. He makes it clear that the police official had not requested him to record the statement of the deceased nor he was requested to stay there for recording of patient’s statement. He then stated that he did not remember whether before issuing certificate, he had physically and clinically examined the patient. 13. Prosecution has also examined one Scientific Officer namely Mool Raj, who had received a packet forwarded by Dy.SP Doda in biology Division on 25.03.2004. It contained a bundle of long hair stranded giving characteristic smell of burn, which were marked by him. 13. Prosecution has also examined one Scientific Officer namely Mool Raj, who had received a packet forwarded by Dy.SP Doda in biology Division on 25.03.2004. It contained a bundle of long hair stranded giving characteristic smell of burn, which were marked by him. The study of the hair was conducted and on the basis of morphological examination, it revealed that the bunch of hair were belonging to human being. He got his certificate exhibited as EXPW-MR. 14. We have main witnesses to the occurrence namely Mst. Asha Devi and her husband Ajit Singh. The prosecution case is that the occurrence has taken place in the rented room in the house of Ajit Singh. PW Asha Devi has deposed that accused Joginder Singh was working at STD in the month of May, 2003. On the date of occurrence, when she saw the deceased coming out of the room crying, she and her husband came out and extinguished the fire, which had engulfed Babli Devi. She further stated that the deceased was taken to the hospital by her husband and other persons. She then stated that she did not put any question to the deceased as to how she had caught fire. At this juncture she was declared hostile by the Public Prosecutor. She was, however, cross-examined with regard to making of statement by the deceased to her involving her husband Joginder Singh and she denied the same. 15. However, PW Ajit Singh in his statement has stated that he tried to extinguish the fire and enquired from Babli Devi (since deceased) as to how she caught fire, upon which she replied that the accused was beating/killing her. He has further stated that accused threw water on her and extinguished fire. He too was declared hostile as he did not support the case of the prosecution with regard to any quarrel ever took place between the deceased and the accused Joginder Singh prior to the occurrence. He was cross-examined by the Public Prosecutor with regard to his statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. involving Joginder Singh, husband of the deceased and even his mother Mst. Goran Devi, who had come to the rented room of the accused one day prior to the occurrence. He denied all this. 16. We have another set of evidence before us. PW Gori Lal, the father of the deceased. He is real brother of Mst. Goran Devi-accused. Goran Devi, who had come to the rented room of the accused one day prior to the occurrence. He denied all this. 16. We have another set of evidence before us. PW Gori Lal, the father of the deceased. He is real brother of Mst. Goran Devi-accused. He in his substantive statement, has stated that six months after the marriage, accused-Joginder Singh and his mother (Mst. Goran Devi) had started mal treating his daughter on the pretext of bringing less dowry and used to demand Rs.1 lac for Joginder Singh’s employment. He further stated that Mst. Goran Devi used to instigate his son for torturing his daughter. He also talks of compromise arrived at between the parties, and ultimately accused- Joginder Singh and deceased started living in a rented accommodation (place of occurrence). He then talks of reaching of the hospital after getting information of the incident from where his son Ashok Kumar, his brother, brother-in-law Mohan Lal, sister Sarishta Devi had taken deceased to GMC hospital Jammu. He then talks of the statement of Babli Devi recorded by the police in his presence on 30.05.2003. He also talks of locking of the room by the police after the occurrence and lifting the articles in his presence through seizure memo. He has also stated in his cross examination that they had visited the hospital on the information supplied to them by accused Joginder Singh, who disclosed that deceased had caught fire due to bursting of stove, but in fact, no stove had busted. He further makes it clear that when Mst. Babli Devi regained consciousness after 2/3 days in Jammu Hospital, she remained conscious for 2/3 days and thereafter she did not talk for two days before her death. He then states that when statement of Babli Devi was being recorded, she narrated the story in Bhadwerwahi (local language of the region) and Urdu. The words spoken in Bhaderwahi were translated by him to the Investigating Officer. He then states that he did not know as to who was the doctor sitting by the side of the injured, but after recording the statement, Investigating Officer and doctors had left. It has further come in his evidence that different doctors were treating his daughter. The words spoken in Bhaderwahi were translated by him to the Investigating Officer. He then states that he did not know as to who was the doctor sitting by the side of the injured, but after recording the statement, Investigating Officer and doctors had left. It has further come in his evidence that different doctors were treating his daughter. He was confronted from his previous statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. with regard to the demand of Rs.1 lac and Television by way of dowry, to which he explained that he did not know as to why the police did not make a mention of this fact in his statement. 17. PW Ashok Kumar, real brother of the deceased, also talks about the torturing of his sister by accused Joginder Singh and his mother. He, however, states that on 27.05.2003, Joginder Singh came to their house and stated that Babli Devi was admitted in the hospital after receiving burn injuries. He then talks of regaining of the consciousness by Babli Devi on 30.05.2003 and making statement before police describing the entire occurrence. In fact, this witness toes the statement of his father, Gori Lal. 18. About the specific demand of Rs.1 lac and colour television, his explanation is also the same as tendered by PW Gori Lal about the non mentioning of this fact in the statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. He further states that the statement of Babli Devi was attested by his father and Mst. Shreshta Devi (real sister of Gori Lal). 19. We have then the evidence of one Mohan Lal, brother-in-law of Gori Lal (husband of sister), who after giving the flashback of the earlier events, has stated that after getting the information of the occurrence, he came to GMC Jammu where Mst. Babli Devi was getting treatment and when she regained consciousness, on their asking she told that on the date of occurrence she was at her residence and when accused came from STD, he caught her from neck and started beating her with shoe and thereafter he sprinkled kerosene oil on her and set her ablaze with match stick and thereafter she became unconscious. He states that his brother-in-law, Goril Lal, was also present there at the time of such disclosure. 20. He states that his brother-in-law, Goril Lal, was also present there at the time of such disclosure. 20. In his cross-examination, he is categoric in saying that he had joined his duties on 29th and went back to Jammu on 30th May. He then stated that they were sitting outside and heard Babli Devi crying and when they entered the ward, they enquired from her about the occurrence, upon which she narrated the entire incident to them and again became unconscious. About the allegation of infidelity, this witness has stated that Joginder Singh and his mother had themselves disclosed this fact to him after six months of the marriage in presence of his wife and others and he refuted the same. It is pertinent to mention here that this witness does not talk about recording of the statement of Babli Devi by the police on 30.05.2003, rather according to him, Babli Devi stated the entire occurrence to her family members including her father. 21. The prosecution has examined another witness namely PW Amrish Kumar, undergoing training of Lab. Assistant in GMC Jammu. He has deposed that on 27.05.2003 he got a telephonic call from the family member of Babli Devi that she was under treatment at GMC Jammu and he went to see her in burn ward where all the relatives including the father of the deceased was also present. He further states that till 29.05.2003, she remained unconscious and on 30.05.2003 regained consciousness and started talking and disclosed that her husband (Joginder Singh) was at work at STD and at about 10 p.m. when he came back, he started beating her and after pouring kerosene oil on her, set her ablaze. He further stated that Babli Devi told that her landlord came out and extinguished fire by pouring water. It has further come in his statement that when she was making statement, one doctor, two police personnel, one nurse and father of the deceased were hearing her statement. 22. In his cross-examination, he has stated that accused Joginder Singh had also applied bandage on his hand but he did not know whether the hand was burnt or not. He then stated that Mst. Babli Devi disclosed the incident in Urdu language, but he did not know the name of the doctor, who was present at that time. 23. 22. In his cross-examination, he has stated that accused Joginder Singh had also applied bandage on his hand but he did not know whether the hand was burnt or not. He then stated that Mst. Babli Devi disclosed the incident in Urdu language, but he did not know the name of the doctor, who was present at that time. 23. The main investigation is conducted by PW Tara Chand Head Constable only. He recorded the statement of Mst. Babli Devi on 30.05.2003, which is exhibited as EXPW-TC. He states that before recording it, he had obtained the certificate from the Medical Officer and requested him to attest the statement, but he refused to do so on the pretext that he had already issued separate certificate for her fitness. He also talks of lifting of articles from the place of occurrence in the presence of PWs Prithvi Raj Manhas and Ram Lal. 24. In his cross examination, this witness states that when he went to record the statement of Babli Devi, her father, two nurses and one doctor were already there. Babli Devi could speak Dogri and Hindi, and made her statement in Hindi. He further stated that he recorded the statement of Babli Devi in presence of doctor and nurses, but did not obtain their signatures as witnesses. His experience in the police department as stated by him is of 28 years and was well versed with the police rules. He then states that other relatives of Mst. Babli Devi were also in the ward at the time of recording of statement, but when they were asked to sign it, they refused. However, he had not mentioned this fact in the statement. He refuted the suggestion that father of Babli Devi dictated the statement. He admits that there are many Magistrates in Jammu town, but he did not make any request to the Magistrate for recording the statement of the injured. He then states that after recording the statement, he had gone to FSL and came back to Doda on 03.06.2003, although SHO Police Station Doda was informed on phone regarding recording of statement. 25. This is all about main evidence produced by the prosecution. 26. He then states that after recording the statement, he had gone to FSL and came back to Doda on 03.06.2003, although SHO Police Station Doda was informed on phone regarding recording of statement. 25. This is all about main evidence produced by the prosecution. 26. Besides producing three witnesses in defence to show that accused was working in STD shop and having cordial relations with the deceased wife, he himself appeared as witness under Section 342-A Cr.P.C. (corresponding to Section 315 of the Central Code). His statement needs to be referred to in brief. He states that his sister was married to his brother-in-law Ramesh (son of Gori Lal), who was SPO and killed by militants in 2001. Government had paid Rs.2 lacs on his death, which his father-in-law (Gori Lal) wanted to grab, but they deposited the said amount in the name of his sister and three children, which was to the disliking of Gori Lal. As such, he became inimical against them. In fact, Gori Lal-his father-in-law, has been projected to be the root cause of rift between him and his deceased wife and a false case of maintenance was also got registered against him at his instance, which ultimately ended into compromise and he and his wife started staying happily. He further stated that the deceased was daughter of his real maternal uncle (mother’s brother). About the occurrence, the explanation tendered by the accused is that at about 9 p.m. when he came back from his work, he found his wife and daughter sleeping. He awakened his wife and asked her to heat up the meal and he himself went to bathroom. In the bathroom, he heard the cries and when he came out, he found the stove pipe had busted and his wife caught fire on her front side. He immediately sprinkled water from tanki and covered her with a blanket. In the meantime, his landlord and his wife also came there and helped in extinguishing the fire. Thereafter, he took Babli Devi to the District Hospital Doda and on the very next day, he informed his in-laws of the incident. As the injured was referred to GMC Jammu, he alongwith his father-in-law and other family members came to GMC Jammu and ultimately on 06.06.2003 she succumbed to the injuries. Thereafter, he took Babli Devi to the District Hospital Doda and on the very next day, he informed his in-laws of the incident. As the injured was referred to GMC Jammu, he alongwith his father-in-law and other family members came to GMC Jammu and ultimately on 06.06.2003 she succumbed to the injuries. He has further stated that when he had taken his wife to the hospital, he did not lock the room and in his absence his father-in-law visited his house twice or thrice and taken certain articles. He was cross-examined with regard to the occurrence in which he disclosed that doctor had enquired from him and he told that the fire was caught from the stove. With regard to the burn injuries received by him, he was categoric in saying that he obtained certificate from the doctor, but at the time of arrest the police had taken away that certificate and even on the date of his arrest his hand was bandaged. 27. On Court question, he stated that his daughter, who was sleeping, woke up after the fire was extinguished. He made it clear that the deceased used to prepare the meal while sitting and not standing on the shelf. About the landlord (PW Ajit Singh), he stated that he remained with him in the hospital for half an hour and thereafter he was all alone and when in the morning he went to inform his father-in-law, he requested his uncle Hans Raj to take care of his wife and returned back within half an hour. 28. Heard Mr. Wazir, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Bakshi, learned Dy. Advocate General representing the State. Perused the entire record minutely. 29. The main thrust of argument of Mr. Wazir is against the `dying declaration’. He claims that it is tutored one, suffering from many defects including the manner in which it was recorded. 30. To strengthen his arguments, Mr. Wazir submits that Babli Devi had received burn injuries on the night intervening 26th/27th of May, 2003 and was initially taken to Government Hospital Doda, from where she was referred to GMC Jammu on the next day i.e. 27.05.2003. The prosecution has not brought the Medical Legal Report (MLR) of Babli Devi prepared by doctor of Government Hospital Doda. The concerned doctor has not been produced by the prosecution to depict the physical condition of the victim. The prosecution has not brought the Medical Legal Report (MLR) of Babli Devi prepared by doctor of Government Hospital Doda. The concerned doctor has not been produced by the prosecution to depict the physical condition of the victim. This is the position even upto 30.05.2003 till recording of the statement. He goes on to submit that the police swung into action on 03.06.2003 whereas the statement was recorded on 30.05.2003 by HC Tara Chand. The statement remained with this police official upto 03.06.2003. This delay is fatal to the prosecution and creates lot of doubts about the genuineness of the statement, now to be treated as `Dying Declaration’. 31. Mr. Wazir then submits that even if Babli Devi was shown fit to make statement at a particular time by the attending doctor, still the manner in which the `dying declaration’ is recorded is again not free from suspicion. Admittedly doctor who gave the certificate was not present at the time of recording of the statement and it is recorded by HC Tara Chand in the presence of Gori Lal, the father of the deceased. The explanation tendered by HC Tara Chand is that he had requested the doctor to sign the statement, but he refused to sign stating that he had already issued the certificate, does not appear to be trustworthy. In the same breath, he submits that there are many infirmities in the evidence of main witnesses to the `dying declaration’ namely Gori Lal, Ashok Kumar, Mohan Lal and Amrish Kumar and while pointing out those defects, he submits that possibility of tutoring in its recording cannot be ruled out. 32. Mr. Wazir lastly submits that it has come on record that although Magistrates are stationed in the town, yet no Magistrate was requested to record the statement of Babli Devi. Had the services of any Magistrate availed of while recording the statement of deceased, no finger could be possibly raised about its credibility. The police has intentionally not adhered to the police rules in the present case so as to give leverage to the complainant side to coin-up a story of its own. Had the services of any Magistrate availed of while recording the statement of deceased, no finger could be possibly raised about its credibility. The police has intentionally not adhered to the police rules in the present case so as to give leverage to the complainant side to coin-up a story of its own. While pointing out certain weaknesses in the investigation carried out in the case, he states that on one hand the `dying declaration’ is not free from doubts so as to make the basis of conviction, on the other hand, the explanation tendered by the accused, appears to be most plausible as narrated by him when stepped into the witness box after seeking a formal permission of the Court under Section 342-A Cr.P.C. He had also received injuries while saving the deceased and also informed about the occurrence to his in-laws without wasting any time as is admitted by Ashok Kumar, the real brother of the deceased. This all absolves him of the charge. 33. On the basis of the aforesaid submissions, Mr. Wazir prays for acquittal of the accused, which is vehemently opposed by Mr. Bakshi, learned State counsel, submitting that the `dying declaration’ has been found by the trial Court to be voluntary and truthful, which is otherwise corroborated by the evidence of other witnesses, who were present in the hospital when the statement was being recorded. Therefore, it is absolutely safe to act upon it. Mr. Bakshi then submits that the `dying declaration’ alone can form basis of conviction and rule of corroboration is merely a rule of prudence as is the settled law. But in the present case, the `dying declaration’ by itself is true to the core and gets corroboration also. Certain contradictions in the statement of the witnesses or some defects vis-`-vis procedure adopted by the police in recording the dying declaration, as pointed out, will not destroy the basic `dying declaration’. Therefore, according to Mr. Bakshi, the conviction of accused-Joginder Singh as already recorded by the trial Court deserves to be upheld. Nemo moriturus praesumitur mentire: No one at the time of death is presumed to tell lie is the philosophy underlying admittance in evidence of dying declaration. This is the reason that dying declaration enjoys a sacrosanct status as a piece of evidence being in the shape of last words coming from the mouth of the deceased (victim). Nemo moriturus praesumitur mentire: No one at the time of death is presumed to tell lie is the philosophy underlying admittance in evidence of dying declaration. This is the reason that dying declaration enjoys a sacrosanct status as a piece of evidence being in the shape of last words coming from the mouth of the deceased (victim). On the basis of this principle, in `Khushal Rao v. State of Bombay’ AIR 1958 SC 22 , their Lordships of Apex Court held that it is not a rule of law or even the rule of prudence that `dying declaration’ cannot be made the sole foundation of conviction. This view has been reiterated in subsequent judgments also rendered by the Apex Court. 34. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in case `Sham Shankar Kankaria v. State of Maharashtra’ 2006 (4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 239 has taken stock of the following cases where the principles governing dying declaration have been laid down: i) Paniben v. State of Gujarat 1992 (3) R.C.R. (Cri.) 552: (1992) 2 SCC 474 ; ii) Munnu Raja v. State of M.P., (1976) 3 SCC 104 ; iii) State of U.P. v. Ram Sagar Yadav, 1985(1) R.C.R. (Cri.) 600: 1985 (1) SCC 552 ; iv) Ramawati Devi v. State of Bihar, (1983) 1 SCC 211 v) K. Ramachandra Reddy v. Public Prosecutor, [ (1976) 3 SCC 618 ] vi) Rasheed Beg v. State of M.P., (1974) 4 SCC 264 ; vii) Kake Singh v. State of M.P., (1981) Supp. SCC 25; viii) Ram Manorath v. State of U.P., (1981) 2 SCC 654 ; ix) State of Maharashtra v. Krishnamurti Laxmipati Naidu, (1980) Supp. SCC 455; x) Surajdeo Ojha v. State of Bihar, [(1980) Supp SCC 769] xi) Nanhau Ram v. State of M.P., (1988) Supp. SCC 152 xii) State of U.P. v. Madan Mohan, (1989) 3 SCC 390 ; xiii) Mohanlal Gangaram Gehani v. State of Maharashtra, [ (1982) 1 SCC 700 ] 35. It is also well settled that the rule requiring corroboration is merely a rule of prudence. However, in order to pass the test of reliability, the `dying declaration’ has to be subjected to a very close scrutiny keeping in view the fact that the statement has been made in absence of the accused, who had no opportunity of testing the veracity of the statement by cross-examination. However, in order to pass the test of reliability, the `dying declaration’ has to be subjected to a very close scrutiny keeping in view the fact that the statement has been made in absence of the accused, who had no opportunity of testing the veracity of the statement by cross-examination. Once after scrutinizing the `dying declaration’ the Court ensures that it is not the result of tutoring, prompting or imagination and is true and voluntary, the conviction can be based upon it. Where a `dying declaration’ suffers from infirmity, it cannot be made the basis of conviction. 36. It is also well settled that merely because a `dying declaration’ contains the details of the occurrence, it is not to be rejected and equally if it is a brief statement, it is not to be discarded. On the contrary, the shortness of the statement guarantees the truth. We are also conscious of the settled legal position that it is not essential that a `dying declaration’ should be made only before a Magistrate as Section 32 of the Evidence Act, no-where states that the `dying declaration’ must be recorded in the presence of Magistrate. It can be recorded by a police officer in the presence of the doctor, who had given an opinion that the patient is in a fit state of making the statement. Similarly, if the `dying declaration’ is not recorded in `question-answer’ form, this by itself cannot be a ground of its rejection. There are certain steps provided in the police rules, which normally, are to be followed by every investigating officer while recording `dying declaration’. However, non-compliance thereof strictly would not make it unreliable. 37. What is evidentiary value of dying declaration, the law has been summed up once again in a recent judgment of Apex Court in case `Dayal Singh v. State of Maharashtra’ 2007 (3) All India Criminal Law Reporter (S.C.) page 346, wherein their Lordships while referring to Khushal Rao’s case (supra) and other judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court on various aspects with regard to credibility of `dying declaration’ have observed as under:- "Para 18: The earliest case in which the law on the point of dying declaration was considered in detail by this Court in Khushal Rao v. State of Bombay AIR 1958 SC 22 . The Court rules that it cannot be laid down as an absolute rule of law that a dying declaration cannot form the sole basis of conviction unless it is corroborated; each case must be determined on its own facts keeping in view the circumstances in which the dying declaration was made; it cannot be laid down as a general proposition that a dying declaration is a weaker kind of evidence than other pieces of evidence; a dying declaration stands on the same footing as another piece of evidence and has to be judged in the light of surrounding circumstances and with reference to the principles governing the weighing of evidence. It has been further held that in order to pass the test of reliability, a dying declaration has to be subjected to a very close scrutiny, keeping in view the fact that the statement has been made in the absence of the accused who had no opportunity of testing the veracity of the statement by cross-examination. But once the Court has come to the conclusion that the dying declaration was the truthful version as to the circumstances of the death and the assailants of the victim, there is no question of further corroboration. Para 19: In State of Uttar Pradesh v. Ram Sagar Yadav, (1985) 1 SCC 552 the Court speaking through Chandrachud, C.J. held as under: "It is well settled that, as a matter of law, a dying declaration can be acted upon without corroboration. See Khushal Rao v. State of Bombay, AIR 1958 SC 22 . Haban Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR 1962 SC 439 , Gopal Singh v. State of M.P. 1972 (3) SCC 268 . There is not even a rulke of prudence which has hardened into a rulke of law that a dying declaration cannot be acted upon unless it is corroborated. The primary effort of the Court has to be find out whether the dying declaration is true. If it is no question of corroboration arises. There is not even a rulke of prudence which has hardened into a rulke of law that a dying declaration cannot be acted upon unless it is corroborated. The primary effort of the Court has to be find out whether the dying declaration is true. If it is no question of corroboration arises. It is only if the circumstances surrounding the dying declaration are not clear or convincing that the Court may, for its assurance, look for corroboration to the dying declaration.." Para 20: In K. Ramachandra Reddy and another v. The Public Prosecutor, 1976 (3) SCC 618 it was held that a great solemnity and sanctity is attached to the words of a dying man because a person on the verge of death is not likely to tell lies or to concoct a case so as to implicate an innocent person yet the Court has to be on guard against the statement of the deceased being a result of either tutoring, prompting or a produce of imagination. It was further held that the Court must be satisfied that the deceased was in a fit state of mind to make the statement after the deceased had a clear opportunity to obverse and identify his assailants and that he was making the statement without any influence or rancour. Once the Court is satisfied that the dying declaration is true and voluntary it can be sufficient to found the conviction even without any further corroboration. In Pothakamuri Srinivasulu v. State of A.P., (2002) 6 SCC 399 it has been held that if the deceased made statement to the witnesses and there testimony is found to be reliable the same is enough to sustain the conviction of the accused. In Maftbhai Nagarbhai Raval v. State of Gujarat, (1992) 4 SCC 69 it was held that the doctor who has examined the victim was the most competent witness to speak about her condition. Para 22: The other reason given by the High Court is that the dying declaration was not in question- answer form. Very often the deceased is merely asked as to how the incident took place and the statement is recorded in a narrative form. In fact such statement is more natural and gives the version of the incident as it has been perceived by the victim. Very often the deceased is merely asked as to how the incident took place and the statement is recorded in a narrative form. In fact such statement is more natural and gives the version of the incident as it has been perceived by the victim. The question whether a dying declaration which has not been recorded in question-answer form can be accepted in evidence or not has been considered by this Court on several occasions. In Ram Bihari Yadav v. State of Bihar and others, (1998) 4 SCC 517 , it was held as follows: "It can not be said that unless the dying declaration is in question-answer form, it could not be accepted. Having regard to the sanctity attached to a dying declaration as it comes from the mouth of a dying person though, unlike the principle of English law he need not to be under apprehension of death, it should be in the actual words of the maker of the declaration. Generally, the dying declaration ought to be recorded in the form of questions and answers but, if dying declaration is not elaborate but consists of only a few sentences and is in the actual words of the maker the mere fact that it is not in question-answer form cannot be a ground against its acceptability or reliability. The mental condition of the maker of the declaration, alterness of mind, memory and understanding of what he is saying, are matter which can be observed by any person. But to lend assurance to those factors having regard to the importance of the dying declaration, the certificate of a medically trained person is insisted upon." Para 23: In Padmaben Shamalbhai Patel v. State of Gujarat, (1991) 1 SCC 744 it was held that the failure on the part of the medical men to record the statement of the deceased in question and answer form cannot in any manner affect the probative value to the attached to their evidence. This view was reiterated in State of Rajasthan v. Bhup Ram, (1997) 10 SCC 675 and Jai Prakash and others v. State of Haryana, (1998) 7 SCC 284 ." 38. This view was reiterated in State of Rajasthan v. Bhup Ram, (1997) 10 SCC 675 and Jai Prakash and others v. State of Haryana, (1998) 7 SCC 284 ." 38. After following the ratio of the aforementioned judgments on all the aspects including the manner of recording the `Dying Declaration’, it can be safely said that for holding conviction on dying declaration, the touchstone is that it must pass the test of its reliability. This, however, depends upon the facts of each individual case. Let us now examine the case at hand in this regard in the light of the main evidence referred to hereinabove. 39. The vital issue for consideration before us is, whether deceased Babli Devi had caught fire accidentally on account of bursting of the stove while heating the meal on the date of occurrence as put forth by accused Joginder Singh or the dying declaration (EXPW-TC) made by her involving him, is trustworthy so as to uphold his conviction. 40. First of all, we will examine the `dying declaration’ independently vis-a-vis its reliability. 41. The case set up by the prosecution throughout is that Mst. Babli Devi (since deceased) was not in a position to make a statement upto 30.05.2003 when PW Head Constable Tara Chand approached Dr. Kailash Singh (doctor on duty in the burn ward) for obtaining fitness certificate of the patient. Admittedly, there is no evidence on record to show that from 27.05.2003, the date when Mst. Babli Devi was referred to GMC Jammu upto 30.05.2003, any police official had ever approached the doctor for obtaining the fitness certificate. We find only one fact from the statement of H.C Tara Chand that on 27.05.2003 when police went to Government Hospital Doda, Babli Devi was found unfit to make the statement. Even to that effect, neither the concerned doctor has been produced nor any certificate has been proved on record. Another admitted position before us is that the prosecution has not placed any documentary evidence on record about the physical and clinical treatment provided to the victim atleast upto 30.05.2003, the date when her statement was recorded so as to know as to what was her mental condition throughout these days. Another admitted position before us is that Dr. Another admitted position before us is that the prosecution has not placed any documentary evidence on record about the physical and clinical treatment provided to the victim atleast upto 30.05.2003, the date when her statement was recorded so as to know as to what was her mental condition throughout these days. Another admitted position before us is that Dr. (PW) Kailash Singh, who has stepped into the witness box, was not the treating doctor of the injured and was on duty incidentally in the Burn Ward when HC Tara Chand had contacted him. He is a doctor from another stream (Surgery Ward) as is admitted by him in his cross-examination. He also admitted categorically that he never treated Mst. Babli Devi and the police did not approach Head of the Department (HOD) of Burn Ward. 42. No other doctor has stepped into the witness box to prove any document with regard to sending of any intimation to the police with regard to the admission of Babli in Govt. Medical College, Hospital, Jammu or making any request to the police for recording of her statement. It is only on 30-5-2003, that Head Constable, Tara Chand goes to the Burn Ward and asked for the opinion with regard to her fitness. What was his source of information in this regard is not known. Possibility cannot be ruled out that Babli Devi might be in a position to make statement before Head Constable, Tara Chand reached the hospital. It could be a day prior to recording of her statement or even on 30-5-2003 itself. Therefore, in the present set of circumstances, we have to be very cautious before holding conviction of accused Joginder Singh, primarily on the basis of dying declaration of Babli Devi. 43. Let us now examine the evidence of the other witnesses also produced by the prosecution for the purposes of corroborating the dying declaration for the reason that prosecution itself is asking for it. It is in two sets. One set consists of father of the deceased PW Gouri Lal, brother of the deceased PW Ashok Kumar, brother-in-law of Gouri Lal PW Mohan Lal and PW Amrish Kumar, who were present in the hospital and visiting Babli before she made the statement to the police. It is in two sets. One set consists of father of the deceased PW Gouri Lal, brother of the deceased PW Ashok Kumar, brother-in-law of Gouri Lal PW Mohan Lal and PW Amrish Kumar, who were present in the hospital and visiting Babli before she made the statement to the police. The other set of evidence is PW Smt Asha Devi and her husband Ajit Singh where Babli and Joginder were staying in a rented room. 44. Smt. Asha Devi has not supported the case of the prosecution and declared hostile. Her husband PW Ajit Singh has also been declared as hostile but he talks about some words said by Babli in his presence. Both of them had taken Babli to the Govt. Hospital, Doda along with accused Joginder and even went to Govt. Medical College, Hospital, Jammu on 27-5-2003. The case of the prosecution is that police had reached Govt. Hospital, Doda on 27-5-2003 itself after getting the information about the admission of Babli. Had Ajit been knowing about the manner in which the incident had occurred or had Babli disclosed to him about it, he would have certainly disclosed all these facts to the police and in that eventuality a case under Section 307 RPC would have been registered on 27-5-2003 itself, whereas, it is not so. We, for our satisfaction, have appreciated this aspect yet from another angle. Statement of Babli, which is the basis of the recording of the FIR, is not only containing the complete details of the occurrence but about all the incidents prior to the occurrence showing the involvement of her mother-in-law since her marriage. She even states that when she was set ablaze by her husband and by the time she raised alarm, the fire engulfed her and she became unconscious. She further stated that on regaining consciousness, she found herself to be admitted in GMC Jammu. She did not whisper a word about Ajit or his wife reaching there to save her and she also disclosed the manner of occurrence to them, accusing her husband. We, therefore, do not attach any weightage to the statement of PW Ajit even if considering that some part of evidence of a hostile witness, if found trustworthy, can be taken into account. 45. We, therefore, do not attach any weightage to the statement of PW Ajit even if considering that some part of evidence of a hostile witness, if found trustworthy, can be taken into account. 45. Statement of Mohan Lal, the real brother-in- law of PW Gouri lal (father of the deceased) is badly starring at the prosecution and it creates a lot of suspicion in our mind with regard to the sanctity to be attached to the dying declaration. He states that after getting the information of the incident, he along with his wife reached GMC, Jammu where they found Babli admitted. He further states that he came back and left his wife there in the hospital itself and went again on 30-5-2003 and on that day, Babli had disclosed to them about the manner in which the entire occurrence had taken place. It is virtually the same, which has now taken the shape of dying declaration. He is very categoric in saying that at that time, father of the deceased and other family members were present. He does not say a word that Babli had disclosed about the occurrence in the presence of Head Constable, Tara Chand or any doctor present in the ward. If, he being a witness lending corroboration to the dying declaration was not supporting the line of prosecution, he could be declared hostile and in cross-examination he might have supported the case of the prosecution. However, the factual position now before us is that prior to recording of the statement by Head Constable, Tara Chand, Babli was fit to make statement and had, in fact, disclosed each and every aspect to her family members including her father. When did she disclose about the occurrence is again not known. This really creates doubt in our mind not only about the true facts with regard to the occurrence but also the manner in which it is recorded. If it is so, the possibility of tutoring Babli Devi before Head Constable, Tara Chand reached the hospital cannot be ruled out. Thus, it would be unsafe to hold that Dying Declaration was voluntary and in its purest form. Another inference can also be drawn by us that the prosecution was not sure about the truthfulness of the dying declaration, therefore, at every stage asked for the corroboration, but failed. Thus, it would be unsafe to hold that Dying Declaration was voluntary and in its purest form. Another inference can also be drawn by us that the prosecution was not sure about the truthfulness of the dying declaration, therefore, at every stage asked for the corroboration, but failed. We do find many vital infirmities in the statement of Gouri Lal, his son Ashok and Amrish but even if, we give some latitude to all these flaws, still the statement of Mohan Lal, who is none else but from the close relation of Gouri Lal being his brother-in-law cannot be ignored at all. 46. Since we are testing the veracity of dying declaration on the touchstone of its reliability, we have appreciated it in the light of evidence of PW Gouri Lal also, who is very categoric in saying that when Babli made the statement before the police, no one else from his family was there. This simply means that the earlier statement made by Babli to her family members was not in the presence of the police. Gouri Lal does not talk of making of statement of his daughter prior to the statement made before the police. Which set of evidence is true for believing, is again a very disturbing feature in the present case? The fact remains that the time, the manner and the true story with regard to the original occurrence, all these vital aspects are under clouds of suspicion. We do not feel the necessity of entering into detailed discussion with regard to the evidence of PW Ashok Kumar, the brother of the deceased and PW Amrish, though their evidence is also contradictory to each other. 47. Describing the occurrence in detail or short by the declarant depends upon the mental state of the victim of each case and also to be adjudged from the attending circumstances. Sometimes the victim is in such an acute pain that he cannot depict the minutest details of the occurrence. In that eventuality, the statement has to be very brief and short. At the same time, there can be a situation when the injured is in such a mental state that he is able to depict even the minutest details of the occurrence. In that eventuality, the statement has to be very brief and short. At the same time, there can be a situation when the injured is in such a mental state that he is able to depict even the minutest details of the occurrence. For instance, a victim has received burn injuries only on legs or hands not effecting the vital parts or the severity of the injury is not that grave creating problem to make a statement, it can contain all the minutest details. This all depends upon the facts of each case. In the case at hand, the injuries were of sixty per cent as is clear from the statement of Manju Tikoo (PW), who conducted the postmortem. As discussed hereinabove, there is no evidence on record to show the clinical condition of Babli till recording of her statement on 30-5-2003. So we can gather some information from the statement of Dr. Tikku only. She stated that she had seen the summary file of the deceased regarding her treatment after conducting the postmortem and the word mentioned therein was `initially conscious’, which meant that after receiving the burns, the injured was conscious. She further stated that she could not comment as to what was her position afterwards. Admittedly, she is not the treating doctor and, therefore, much weightage cannot be given to her evidence in this regard. Whatever she stated, it was by putting stress on her memory as the treatment file was not before her. On seeing the burn injuries and giving some weightage to the statement of doctor Manju Tikoo, even if we presume that Babli Devi was conscious for some time, an effort to record her statement should have been made. It is not so. We have to appreciate the statement of Babli as it is before us where the minutest details are given right from the date of marriage, depicting the harassment allegedly caused to her at different occasions by her husband Joginder Singh and mother-in-law Goran Devi (since acquitted) and then about the main occurrence. From this all, it can be safely said that her mental faculties were absolutely supporting her while making the statement. This on the face of it appears to be somewhat abnormal. From this all, it can be safely said that her mental faculties were absolutely supporting her while making the statement. This on the face of it appears to be somewhat abnormal. We are conscious of the settled legal position that if the Dying Declaration contains details of the occurrence, it is not to be rejected and equally if it is brief, it is again not to be discarded. But sometimes abnormal tinge in it can create suspicion. Had statement of Babli been containing few details of the occurrence, we would have not seen it with an eye of suspicion, but minutest detail in her statement that too in a case when she remained unconscious throughout right from the date of occurrence for more than four days and that no evidence being brought about the clinical condition of the victim upto 30th May, which flaw can not be overlooked, it does create lot of doubts. Therefore, testing the statement of Babli on that touchstone, in our view, it does not pass the test of reliability. The matter does not rest here and calls for appreciation, yet from another angle also. If such a lengthy statement of Babli leads the court to draw an inference that she was absolutely in fit state of mind to make this statement, then it can be comfortably said that she was also in the same state of mind before the police reached the hospital and could be tutored very comfortably. We have the evidence of PW Mohan Lal in this regard. The net result is that the statement of Babli was not pure and original coming out from her mouth depicting the true occurrence, rather it was contaminated one, may be at the instance of her father Gouri Lal, who according to accused Joginder Singh was inimical to him for the reasons depicted by him in his statement recorded under Section 342-A of Cr.P.C (corresponding to Section 315 of Central Code). 48. Let us now advert to the manner in which the statement of Babli Devi is recorded and the delay caused by the police in lodging the first information report even after recording of the statement. On the foot of the statement, we find the signature of Head Constable, Tara Chand. However, there is no date on it. There are signatures of Gouri Lal and the thumb impression of Babli Devi. On the foot of the statement, we find the signature of Head Constable, Tara Chand. However, there is no date on it. There are signatures of Gouri Lal and the thumb impression of Babli Devi. There is no certificate of the doctor on this statement to the effect that during recording of the statement, the victim remained in fit state of mind. No doubt, a separate certificate of Dr. Kailash Singh is proved in this regard. The explanation given by Head Constable, Tara Chand is that he asked the doctor to sign the statement but he refused to do so saying that he had already given the certificate of fitness. Signatures of Ashok Kumar are not obtained on this statement, though according to his statement, he was also there when the statement of his sister was being recorded. We can extend some concession for all these procedural irregularities conducted by the I.O but one vital defect, which cannot go unnoticed by us is that the investigating officer does not put the date after recording the statement. This is unusual and normally it is not done. We would have given some concession for even this lapse as well, had there been no delay in lodging the first information report. It is recorded on 3-6-2003 i.e after the lapse of three days. The explanation tendered for this delay by Head Constable, Tara Chand is that he went to FSL along with the statement and informed SHO of the concerned police station on phone about the recording of the statement. This explanation, we cannot just accept being absolutely baseless. In a case of such a serious nature, Head Constable, Tara Chand thought of going to the office of FSL without sending the statement for the lodging of the FIR, which could be sent by any constable accompanying him to the hospital through a written intimation (ruqa) to the SHO. Such a non-serious approach, in fact calls for a stern action against him on departmental platform. Such a non-serious approach, in fact calls for a stern action against him on departmental platform. Any how, this undoubtedly creates a lot of suspicion in our mind about the truthfulness of the original statement as possibility of it being manufactured at any subsequent stage may be at the dictation of Gouri Lal, who himself has admitted when stepped into the witness box that his daughter was stating in a particular regional language, which was being translated by him and thereafter he was dictating it to Head Constable, Tara Chand, can not be ruled out. 49. We are conscious of the settled legal position that it is not essential that the dying declaration should be recorded by a Magistrate or even by a doctor attending to the patient and the statement recorded by the police officer can also be given due weightage if the facts so warrant, but in the case at hand, the manner in which the statement of Babli Devi is recorded and the fact that intentionally it has been delayed for the purposes of registering the FIR goes to draw an adverse inference that the I.O. had intentionally not obtained the signatures of the doctor after recording the statement and the explanation tendered that he refused to do so is neither here nor there. The rule of caution is that the statement should be recorded by the police in the presence of the doctor only. Had the doctor put his signatures after the statement was recorded, he would have certainly given the date and time and in that eventuality, we might not have given importance to the delay in lodging the first information report considering it to be a laxity on the part of the investigating officer for which justice should not become causality. The case at hand, on its own facts, is entirely of different nature, which compels us to lead to a irresistible conclusion that the dying declaration of Babli Devi is not in its purest form. 50. The case at hand, on its own facts, is entirely of different nature, which compels us to lead to a irresistible conclusion that the dying declaration of Babli Devi is not in its purest form. 50. We are now appreciating the entire scene of occurrence in the light of the injuries received by the deceased Babli Devi and the explanation tendered by accused Joginder Singh, who not only suggested his case to the witnesses, but also projected his false implication by summing up the courage to step into the witness box under Section 342-A CrPC after obtaining an order from the trial court by moving a formal application, knowing very well that his statement could be read against him. One fact is admitted by PW Ashok Kumar, the real brother of the deceased that accused Joginder was also having a bandage on his hand when he reached Govt. Hospital, Doda on the next date of the occurrence where his sister was admitted. Another fact is also admitted by the complainant side that they were informed by accused Joginder only. This is what is also said by the accused when examined under Section 342-A CrPC. Although with regard to the burn injuries received by him, there is no medical evidence on record, this by itself would not make his statement unbelievable. Even PW Ajit Singh, the landlord has also stated that accused Joginder had also received burn injuries in this occurrence while extinguishing fire. The injuries received by the deceased as noticed at the time of conducting autopsy are burns present on the face, neck, front of chest, abdomen, both upper limbs and dorsal aspect of both hands. However, palms were spared. There were burns on both lower limbs upto knee. The doctor of autopsy did not talk of burn on the hair, rather no abnormality was noticed on the head. All these injuries are possible when a lady is sitting in front of a stove. The I.O. had lifted two liters of kerosene in the plastic tin along with certain articles, but the stove is not taken into possession by him through recovery/seizure memo. All these injuries are possible when a lady is sitting in front of a stove. The I.O. had lifted two liters of kerosene in the plastic tin along with certain articles, but the stove is not taken into possession by him through recovery/seizure memo. Any how, the seat of burn injuries on the person of the deceased are indicative of the fact that the occurrence had not taken place in the manner as depicted in the statement of Babli Devi, rather possibility of receiving these injuries in the manner as depicted by accused Joginder Singh is more. This probablizes the plea of defence taken by him. 51. Perhaps no other material aspect is left by us untouched. 52. As a sequel to the aforesaid inherent weaknesses when taken collectively make the case of the prosecution very weak and doubtful about the credibility to be attached to the statement (dying declaration of Babli Devi), as in our considered view, it is not free from suspicion. Therefore, we have come to a definite conclusion that it calls for rejection being not safe to hold the conviction of accused, Joginder Singh. 53. Resultantly, we allow criminal appeal No. 40/2009 filed by Joginder Singh and set aside the impugned judgment of his conviction and sentence recorded for the charge of Section 302 RPC. He is acquitted of the said charge and shall be released forthwith, if not required in any other case. 54. Confirmation No. 14/2009 is also answered accordingly.