In Ashok Kumar's case, this Court noticed that if it was a case of death by burning, entries of injury report in the bed head ticket could be construed as dying declaration. [para 13-14] Ashok Kumar v. State of Rajasthan 1990 (1) Suppl. SCR 401 = (1991) 1 SCC 166 Kanaksingh Raisingh Rav v. State of Gujarat (2003) 1 SCC 73 - relied on. 1.2 In the instant case, the doctor (PW-4) who conducted medico-legal examination and recorded the statement of the deceased, specifically deposed that the deceased told him that she was called inside and the door was latched from inside. Kerosene oil was sprinkled upon her and her Jethani had ignited the fire by the match stick. Her husband and mother-in- law were also involved in it. This dying declaration (Ext.PF) was also signed by appellant no.1 which indicates that he was present when statement was recorded. There is nothing on the record to suggest that any of the relation of the deceased was present to influence PW-4. [para 11 and 15] 1.3 Admittedly, the death of the deceased is caused by burns i.e. otherwise than under normal circumstances, within seven years of her marriage. In view of the evidence on record both the courts below have come to the definite conclusion that the deceased was soon before her death, subjected to cruelty and harassment by her husband and his relatives in connection with demand for dowry. Therefore, all the ingredients are present to convict the appellants u/s 304-B, IPC. The prosecution also proved beyond reasonable doubts that the appellants are guilty of the offence punishable u/s 498-A, IPC. The Sessions Judge has recorded cogent and convincing reasons for convicting the appellants for the offences u/ss 304-B and 498-A IPC. [para 17-19] 1.4 The Sessions Judge specifically held that the prosecution miserably failed to prove its case against all the four accused for the offence punishable u/ss 302 and 406 r/w s. 34 IPC and, therefore, all the four accused were acquitted of the said offence. No appeal has been preferred by the complainant or the State against the acquittal of the accused for the offences punishable u/ss 302 and 406 r/w s.34 IPC. The finding of Sessions Judge having reached finality, the question of altering the sentence u/s 304-B to s.302 does not arise. [para 22] Muthu Kutty and Another v. State by Inspector of Police, Tamil Nadu 2004 (6) Suppl. SCR 222 = (2005) 9 SCC 113 - referred to. 1.5 As regards the plea of the appellants to reduce the sentence u/s 304-B IPC, it is significant to note that the appellants were sentenced for life for the offence punishable u/s 304-B IPC, by the trial court. The High Court has already considered the facts and circumstances of the case and reduced the sentence from life imprisonment to 10 years.