THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1582 of 2006 JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice R.Kantha Rao) This Criminal Appeal is directed against the judgment, dated 13.10.2006, passed by the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, in S.C.No.282 of 2005, wherein and whereby the appellant was convicted for the offence under Section 302 IPC and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.100/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one month. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant- accused and the learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State. It is the case of the prosecution that the deceased-Smt Arshia Sultana @ Sultana was married to the appellant about 25 years ago and they were blessed with two daughters namely Nusarath Sulthana and Masrath Sulthana; that the appellant used to consume liquor regularly and also used to beat the deceased and that he was also suspecting the character of his younger daughter that she had illicit intimacy with some person. Further, it is the version of the prosecution that the appellant pushed his younger daughter into a well and she could survive as she knows swimming. On the date of the incident i.e., on 25.11.2004, the appellant went out of his house, consumed alcohol, returned home at 11.45 hours, picked up quarrel with the deceased by demanding money for consuming alcohol and when she refused he became infuriated, poured kerosene on her body and set her on fire. On hearing the cries of the deceased, the neighbours gathered (some of them were examined as witnesses) and extinguished the flames. Initially, they admitted the deceased in Al-Noor Hospital, Hyderabad, and from there, she was shifted to Osmania General Hospital, Hyderabad. After she was shifted to Osmania General Hospital, Hyderabad, P.W-10-Sub-Inspector of Police, Banjara Hills Police Station, rushed to the hospital and recorded the statement of the deceased which is marked as Ex.P-15, basing on which, the First Information Report was registered and subsequently, the case was investigated into and the charge sheet came to be filed against the appellant. Thereafter, before the learned Sessions Judge, the prosecution in order to prove its case, examined P.Ws.1 to 12 and marked Exs.P-1 to P-20 besides M.Os.1 to 5 on its behalf. On behalf of the defence, none was examined but Ex.D-1 was marked. The learned Sessions Judge on a consideration of the entire evidence on record and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, convicted the appellant for the offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him, as mentioned supra. The point for determination in this appeal is as to whether the conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant by the learned Sessions Judge can be sustained. Mainly, the case rests on the two dying declarations- Exs.P-15 and P-19, which are recorded by P.W-10-Sub- Inspector of Police and P.W-12-Magistrate, respectively. In both the dying declarations, the deceased specifically stated that the appellant having come in a drunken state asked her money for consuming liquor and on her refusal, he poured kerosene on her body and set her on fire. This apart, the daughters of the appellant who are examined as P.Ws.1 to 2 also stated in their deposition that their mother informed them about the cause of her death as that of the appellant pouring kerosene over her body and setting her on fire. P.W- 3-a neighbour also deposed that there used to be quarrels between the appellant and the deceased regarding the drunkenness of the appellant. There is no inconsistency on material particulars regarding the cause of death, as stated by the deceased in her two dying declarations, i.e., in Exs.P-15 and P-19, which are recorded by P.W-10 and P.W-12, respectively and the oral dying declarations made to P.Ws.1 to 2. The version as to the cause of the death of the deceased is the same in all the dying declarations. It is settled that law if the dying declarations are truthful, made voluntarily and when there is no taint is attached to the said dying declarations, they can form the sole basis for conviction without corroboration from any independent source. We find any amount of consistency and truthfulness in the above said dying declarations of the deceased and therefore, we have no hesitation to hold that the learned Sessions Judge rightly relied upon the said dying declarations of the deceased and convicted the appellant for the offence under Section 302 IPC. For the reasons aforementioned, the Criminal Appeal is dismissed and the conviction and sentenced imposed on the appellant by the learned Sessions Judge in the impugned judgment are hereby confirmed. ______________________ JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA _______________________ JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO 22nd December 2009 dr THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1582 of 2006 (Judgment of the Bench delivered by the Hon’ble Sri Justice R.Kantha Rao) Dated:22.12.2009 dr