DYING DECLARATION

By
Y. SRINIVASA RAO
M.A (English)., B.Ed., B.L., (LL.M),
I ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE
BHIMAVARAM.

'' A person , who is about to die , would not lie''.

'' Truth sits on the lips of a person who is about to die''

INTRODUCTION:
ThemaximNemomorituruspraesumiturmentireis
basisfor''dyingdeclaration'',whichmeans ''amanwillnotmeethis
makerwithalieinhismouth''. A dying declaration is called as '' Leterm
Mortem''. The word '' Leterm Mortem'' means '' Words said before death''.
Recordingofdyingdeclarationisveryimportanttask.Utmostcareisto
betakenwhilerecordingadyingdeclaration.Ifadyingdeclaration is
recordedcarefullybytheproperperson,keepinginmindtheessential
ingredientsofthedyingdeclaration,suchdeclarationretainsitsfullvalue.
Section32(1)ofIndianEvidenceAct.
Aclosescrutinyofsection32(1)ofIndianEvidenceAct,itis
vividlyknownwhenthestatementismadebyapersonwithregardtothe
causeofhisdeath,oranyofthecircumstancesofthetransactionwhich
resultedinhisdeath,incasesinwhichthecauseofthatpersonsdeath
comes intoquestion. Suchstatements arerelevantirrespective of the
personwhomadesuchdeclarationwasexpectingdeathornot.Thus,itis
apt tosaythatadmissibilityof Dyingdeclaration isexplainedinthe
section32(1)ofIndianEvidenceAct.
How a dying declaration should be?

There is no particular form of dying declaration. However,

the best form of dying declaration is in the form of questions and
answers. However,wheneveradyingdeclaration isbeingrecordedin
theformofquestionsandanswersprecautionshouldbetakenthatexactly
whatquestionsareaskedandwhatanswersaregivenbythepatientthose
shouldbewritten.
A dying declaration may be in the following forms:
1. Written form;
2. Verbal form;
3. Gestures and Signs form. In the case ''Queen vs Abdulla 1'', it was
held that if the injured person is unable to speak, he can make
dying declaration by signs and gestures in response to the question.
4. Ifapersonisnotcapableofspeakingorwritinghecanmakea
gestureintheformofyesornobynoddingandevensuchtypeof
dyingdeclarationisvalid.
5. Itispreferredthatitshouldbewritteninthevernacularwhichthe
patientunderstandsandspeaks.
6. Adyingdeclarationmaybeintheformofnarrations.Incaseofa
dyingdeclarationisrecordedintheformofnarrations,nothingis
beingpromptedandeverythingiscomingassuchfromthemind
ofthepersonmakingit.
OBJECTS;
1. The presumption is '' a person who is about to die would not lie''.
2. It is also said that '' Truth sits on the lips of a person who is about
to die''.
3. The victim is exclusive eye witness and hence such evidence
should not be excluded.
1 ILR 7 385

Whomayrecordadyingdeclaration?
1. Itisbestthatitisrecordedbythemagistrate.
2. If there is no time to call the magistrate, keeping in view the
deteriorating condition of the declarant, it can be recorded by
anybodye.g.publicservantlikedoctororanyotherperson.
3. It cannot be said that a dying declaration recorded by a police
officerisalwaysinvalid.
4. If any dying declaration is not recorded by the competent
Magistrate,itisbetterthatsignaturesofthewitnessesaretaken
whoarepresentatthetimeofrecordingit.
Important facts to be remembered before recording Dying
Declaration:
1. Thedeclarantwasinafitconditionofmindtogivethestatement
whenrecordingwasstartedandremainedinfitconditionofmind
untiltherecordingofdyingdeclarationiscompleted.
2. Thefactoffitconditionofmindofdeclarantcanbebestcertified
bythedoctor.
3. Yet,incaseofwhereitwasnotpossibletotakefitnessfromthe
doctor, dying declarationhasretaineditsfullsanctityifthereare
otherwitnessestotestifythatdeclarantwasinfitconditionofthe
mindwhichdidnotpreventhimfrommakingdyingdeclaration.
4. However, it should not be under the influence of any body or
prepared by prompting, tutoring or imagination. If any dying
declarationbecomessuspicious,itwillneedcorroboration.
5. Ifadeclarantmademorethanonedyingdeclarationsandifthese
arenotatvariancewitheachotherinessencetheyretaintheirfull
value. If these declarations are inconsistency or contradictory,
suchdyingdeclarationslosetheirvalue.
Now it is very essential to know the conditions for admissibility and
evidentiary value of a dying declaration. The table given infra succinctly
explains the same:
CONDITIONS FOR ADMISSIBILITY

EVIDENTIARY VALUE

1. The

declarant

,who

gave

dying

declaration, should have died.

1. Evidentiary value of dying declaration

will

change

from

case

to

case

according to fact and circumstances of

2. Admissibility of dying declaration is

each case.

explained in the section 32 (1) of

2. A dying declaration must be recorded

IndianEvidenceAct.

in exact words spoken by the declarant.

3. When the statement is made by a
personastothecauseofhisdeath,or

3. If a competent Magistrate records a

any of the circumstances of the

dying declaration in question and

transactionwhichresultedinhisdeath,

answer form , such dying declaration

in cases in which the cause of that

will have much evidentiary value.

persons death comes into question.

Such statements are relevant whether
the person who made this was
expectingdeathornot.(Seesection32
(1)ofIndianEvidenceAct).
4. The

dying

declaration

must

be

declarant

than the dying declaration is recorded,

tutoring by interested persons can be

5. In

case

more

than

one

dying

declarations, all such declarations must

5. The cause of death must be explained

the

sooner does the information receive

avoided.

complete 2.

by

4. If a dying declaration is recorded No

or

atleast

the

circumstances which resulted his/her

death must be explained.
6. The declarant, who makes dying
declaration, must be conscious and
coherent.
7. The declarant must be sound state in
mind.
8. The cause of death of declarant must
be in question.
9. However, the declarant need not be
under expectation of death unlike

be identical.
6. In Jai Prakash vs State of Haryana 5, it
was observed that '' a statement of
victim which was recorded by the
police officer in hospital. Later, such
statement was taken to be a dying
declaration.
7. In

some

cases,

F.I.R

was

also

considered as a dying declaration.

8. Inconsistent dying declaration is no
evidentiary value. ( Smt Kamla vs
State of Punjab6)
9. Thedyingdeclarationrecordedbythe

2 Yet, it was held that ''Dyingdeclarationincompleteasdeceasednotbeingabletoanswerfurther,

heldcouldbereliedupon.(AIR1956SC168). ''
5 (1998) 7 SCC 284
6 AIR 1993 SC 374.

5
ClerkinthepresenceofMagistratenot

English Law.

inadmissible. Scribe need not be

10. The declarant need not be under
shadow of death.

producedtoproveit7.

11. The dying declaration may be in verbal

form.
12. The whole dying declaration must be
taken into consideration by the Court
but not some portion of it.
13. The statement may be made before the

10. Despite there is a dying declaration,

Court seeks

further corroboration.

However,Convictioncanbebasedon
itwithoutcorroborationifitistrueand
voluntary.
11. Replies by signs and gestures
constituteverbalstatementresembling

cause of death has arisen, or before the

the case of a dumb person and is

deceased has any reason to anticipate

relevant and admissible in evidence.

being killed4.

(AIR1949Nag405)

14. Corroborationtodyingdeclarationnot
necessary.(1990Crl.L.J1129)

12. Dyingdeclaration isanexception to

hearsay evidence because if this
evidence is not considered very

15. Exact words of deceased in dying

purposeofthejusticewillbeforfeited

declaration need not be stated. (1990

in certain situations when there may

Crl.L.J2720)

notbeanyotherwitnesstothecrime

16. Itisimmaterialthatthe personputa

exceptthepersonwhohassincedied.

thumb impression or signed a dyin

13. Dyingdeclarationisvalidbothincivil

declaration if the declaration is duly

andcriminalcaseswheneverthecause

witnessed.

ofdeathcomesintoquestion.

17. Ifadeclarant,whoislayinginthebed,

14. Dyingdeclarationnotattestedbywife

is unable to get up to sign due his

or dactor present there. Smacks of

condition,oritisconvenientforhimto

concoction. Inconsistency in oral and

put thumb impression, he can put

medical evidence. Conviction cannot

thumbimpression.

bebasedonsuchevidence8.

18. There is usually no time limit that

dyingdeclarationbecomesinvalid.

15. Itisperfectlypermissibletorejecta
partofdyingdeclarationifitisfound
tobeuntrueandifitcanbeseparated
[NandKumarv.stateofMaharastra9.].
16. Declarant suddenly dying and his
thumbimpressiontakenafterhisdeath

3
4

State of Haryana vs Manageram & others (AIR 2003 SC 558)

Pakala Narayana Swami vs Emperor

7(52Cr.L.J883)
8
9

AIR1981SC1578.
CriLJ19881313

6
held dying declaration admissible in
evidence.(AIR1962SC1252)

RELEVANT CASE-LAW AS TO ''DYING DECLARATION'':

1.Medicalopinioncannotwipeoutthedirecttestimonyoftheeyewitness
statingthatthedeceasedwasinfitandconsciousstatetomakethedying
declaration.[NRamvsState10.]
2. If the person making it is imbecile or is of tender age and was
incompetenttotestifyduetothisreason,thatdyingdeclarationwouldnot
bevalid[Rv.Pike.C&P.1829;3:598]
3.Asameasureofsafetyoriginaldyingdeclarationshouldbesenttothe
courtlikeFIRanditsPhotostatshouldbekeptinthecasefile[Stateof
Karnataka v. Shivalingappa, 2001 (4) RCR(Criminal) 237 (Karnataka)
(DB)].

4.Eventhe''History''givenbytheinjuredrecordedbythedoctorinthe
casefilehasbeenconsideredasdyingdeclarationbythehonorableCourt
ifitismentionedthatthepatienttoldinthehistorythatincidentoccurred
in such and such manner which was responsible for the death of the
victim[StateofKarnatakav.Shariff11].

5.Firstinformationreportgotrecordedbythepolicehasbeentakenas
dying declaration by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, when the
persondidnotsurvivetogethisdyingdeclaration recorded[AIR1976
2199(SC)].
10 AIR1988SC912:1988CriLJ1485
11 2003CAR219228,(SC)

6. But, in the case State of Punjab v. Kikar Singh, 2002 (30 RCR
(Criminal)568(P&H)(DB),itwasheldthat''whenpatientremained
admitted in hospital for sufficient days i.e. for 8 days FIR cannot be
treatedasdyingdeclaration''.
7. In the case ''State v. Maregowda, 2002 (1) RCR (Criminal) 376
(Karnataka)(DB)'',itwasheldthat''Asuicidenotewrittenfoundinthe
clothesofthedeceaseditisinthenatureof dyingdeclaration andis
admissibleinevidenceundersection32ofIndianEvidenceAct''.
8. In the case, (State of Gujarat v. Rabri Pancha Punja. Cri LJ.
1981;NOC:171(Guj),itwasheldthat''Itretainsitsfullvalueifitcan
justifythatvictimcouldidentifytheassailant,versionnarratedbyvictim
is intrinsically sound and accords with probabilities and any material
evidenceisnotprovedwrongbyanyotherreliableevidence''.
9.Dyingdeclaration becomesunreliableifitisnotasperprosecution
version.Inthecaseof''StateofUPv.MadanMohan, AIR1989SC1519'',
theHon'bleSupremeCourtofIndiaheld:
1.Itisforthecourttoseethatdyingdeclarationinspiresfullconfidence
as the maker of the dying declaration is not available for cross
examination
2. Court should satisfy that there was no possibility of tutoring or
prompting.
3.Certificateofthedoctorshouldmentionthatvictimwasinafitstateof
mind. Magistrate recording his own satisfaction about the fit mental
conditionofthedeclarantwasnotacceptableespeciallyifthedoctorwas
available.
4.Dyingdeclarationshouldberecordedbytheexecutivemagistrateand
police officer to record the dying declaration only if condition of the
deceasedwassoprecariousthatnootheralternativewasleft.

5.Dyingdeclaration maybeintheformofquestionsandanswersand
answers being written in the words of the person making the dying
declaration.Butcourtcannotbetootechnical.
10.InBarativsStateOfU.P,1974AIR839,1974SCR(3)570,itwas
heldthat''There was no reason to discard the dying declaration made by
the appellant to the police sub-inspector, The trial Court was wrong in
rejecting the dying declaration to the police (F.I.R.) on the ground that the
deceased had stated to the doctor that he had become unconscious after
the occurrence. There was nothing in the statement recorded by the doctor
to indicate that the deceased remained unconscious for. a long time and as
such was not in position to lodge the F.I.R. The fact that the language
used in the dying declaration made to the doctor was rather chaste would
not go to show that the said statement could not have been made by the
deceased. As to the language used in the dying declaration there is
nothing abnormal or unusual in the same person using colloquial
language while talking to one person and using refined language while
talking to another person. ''
11.PakalaNarayanaSwamivsEmperor((1939)41BOMLR428;AIR
1939 PC 47 ) on 19/1/1939 , In this case, the statement of Pakala
Narayana Swamy's wife '' he is going to Berhampur to get back his
amount''wasconsideredas''DYINGDECLARATION''.
Someimportantcaselawon''Dyingdeclaration'':
1. Autar Singh v. The Crown, AIR 1924 Lah 253
2. Pakala Narayana Swami v Emperor, AIR 1939 PC 47
3. Hanumant v. State of Madhya Pradesh , 1953CriLJ129
4. State v. Kanchan Singh, AIR 1954 All 153
5. Ratan Gond v. State of Bihar , 1959CriLJ108
6. Allijan Munshi v. State of Maharashtra, (1959) 61 BOMLR 1620
7. Rajindra Kumar v. State of Punjab, 1960 Cri LJ 851 (P&H)
8. HarbanssinghvstateofPunjab,AIR1962SC439
9. ShivKumarv.StateofUttarPradesh,1966CriAR281,

9
10. Lallubhai v. State of Gujarat, AIR 1972 SC 1776
11. Onkar v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 1974 CriLJ 1200 (MP)
12. BarativsStateOfU.P,1974AIR839
13. MunnuRajaandAnr.v.TheStateofMadhyaPradeshAIR1976SC2199
14. StateofGujaratv.RabriPanchaPunja.CriLJ.1981;NOC:171(Guj)
15. Manohar Lal v. State of Punjab , 1981 CriLJ (SC) 1373
16. State of Punjab v. Savitri Devi, 1983 (2) Crimes 547
17. Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra , 1984CriLJ1738
18. State of UP v Ram Sagar Yadv, AIR 1985 SC 416
19. State (Delhi Administration) v. Laxman Kumar and Ors, AIR 1986 SC 250
20. State of Assam v Mahim Barakataki, AIR 1987 SC 98
21. State of UP v. Madan Mohan. AIR 1989 SC 1519
22. Charipally shakaararao v Public prosecutor HC of AP AIR 1995 SC 777
23. StateofRajasthanvkishore,AIR1996SC3035
24. Smt. Paniben v state of Gujarat, 1992 (2) SCJ 509
25. State of HP v Hem Raj, 1992 SLC 158 P 169 (HP)
26. Jagga Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR1995 SC 135
27. Najjam Faraghi in alias Nijjam Faruqui v. State of West Bengal 1996CriLJ866
28. G.S. Walia v. State of Punjab 1998 CriLJ (SC) 2524
29. Shyam Singh Hada v State of Rajasthan, 2000 Cri LJ 1437 (Raj)
30. Sudhakar & Anr v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2000 SC 2602
31. Ronal Kiprono Ramkat v State of Haryana , AIR 2001 SC 2488
32. Statev.Maregowda,2002(1)RCR(Criminal)376(Karnataka)(DB)
33. State of Punjab v. Kikar Singh, 2002 (30 RCR(Criminal) 568 (P & H) (DB)
34. Santosh Kumar v State of U.P., 2002 CriLJ (SC) 301
35. State v. Maregowda, 2002 (1) RCR (Criminal)376 (Karnataka) (DB)
36. Laxman v. State of Mahrashtra, 2002 Cri L J 4095, (2002) 6 SCC 710
37. Shambhu v State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 2002 SC 1307
38. P V Radha Krishna v. state of Karnatka, AIR 2003 SC 2859

10
39. NarainSinghv.StateofHarayana,AIR2004SC1616
40. Viramji Mohatji Thakore v. State of Gujarat, 2005 (2) GLR 1622
41. Dil Bahadur Tamag v. State of sikkim, 2005 CrLJ 786 p 798
42. RajaRamv.StateofRajasthan,(2005)5SCC272
43. ViramjiMohatjiThakorev.StateofGujarat,2005(2)GLR1622
44. Nirmal Lousi v. State of Banaswadi police, Bangalore, 2005 (1) Kar L J 213
45. State of Punjab v. Chatinder Pal Singh and Ors, AIR 2009 SC 974

CONCLUSION:
Withpropoundsenseofregret,Icravetheindulgenceoftheofficialsand
others concerned , who record dying declaration, it is suggested that
wheneverdyingdeclarationistoberecorded,itmustberecordedvery
carefullykeepinginmindthesanctitywhichthecourtoflawattachesto
thedyingdeclaration.
x