44. The mode and manner, in which the dying declarations came to be recorded, is also something which creates a doubt, as regards its truthfulness and trustworthiness. Although, the Investigating Officer says that the recording of the dying declarations was video-graphed and the CD has been exhibited in evidence yet it is very important to determine the evidentiary value of the same. 45. We should also look into the genesis of the occurrence from a different angle. It is not in dispute that the three deceased died on account of severe burn injuries. It is also not in dispute that the room in which they were sleeping caught fire on account of which they suffered severe burn injuries. It is also not in dispute that inflammable substance like kerosene was found from the room which ignited the fire. However, the moot question is who set the room on fire? Could it be said that the prosecution has been able to prove beyond reasonable doubt that it was only and only the appellant-convict who set the room on fire by pouring the inflammable substance? 46. It appears to us that whoever did the act, the inflammable substance was not directly poured or sprinkled on the three deceased persons. Had it been so, they would have immediately woken up and by the time, the room is sat on fire, they would make good their escape or catch hold of the culprit. It appears that the inflammable substance might have been poured on the floor of the room and thereafter, the fire must have been ignited. Once, the room is on fire, the person responsible for setting the room on fire would immediately leave that place. We find it very difficult to believe that the appellant-convict was still inside the room or even outside the room to be witnessed by the deceased persons as well as by the PW-2 and PW-4, locking the room from outside after setting the room on fire. The conduct 23

選擇目標文字3

連接到段落
連接到實體
取消高亮顯示
新增到目錄