speak lie or to concoct the case so as to implicate an innocent person. As per law, however, when there are multiple dying declarations, consistency in each dying declaration is the relevant factor to be considered for placing full reliance thereupon. In the instant case, though there are multiple dying declarations, all of them are proved to be thoroughly consistent, completely, reliable and voluntary. The first dying declaration is in the form of immediate disclosure made by Bharati before P.W.1 Kishor, her brother-in-law, whose house is just adjacent to the house of the deceased with one partition in between. According to evidence of P.W.1 Kishor, on the date of incident, at about 6 to 6.30 p.m. when he and his wife were in their house, he saw smoke coming out of the house of Bharati. The said smoke was coming to their house also through the door fixed in the partition wall. He further heard cries of Bharati. Hence he and his wife P.W.3 Malan came out of the house and went in front of the door of Bharati's house. They saw Bharati was in flames and the appellant was standing outside the house. They extinguished the fire. At that time Bharati was talking and saying that her husband was suspecting her chastity; he has poured kerosene on her person, set her on fire and then he had come out of the house. As per evidence of P.W.1 Kishor, he and his wife took Bharati to Bhagwati
