It is the written and verbal statements of the persons and their conduct which are made relevant under

section
32. The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 has made a distinction between “written” and “oral” statements in certain
sections like section 3 (“evidence”) and a reference to oral evidence in section 60. Hence, the use of the term
“verbal” and not “oral” in section 32 has given rise to conflict of judicial opinion as to whether “verbal”
means “oral” or something more. Of course, “verbal” would certainly include “oral” statements and the
Courts have held that oral dying declarations are as admissible as written statements. 1

As observed per Hines, J, in Mockabee v Com,2

Dying declarations are not necessarily either written or spoken. Any method of communication between
mind and mind may be adopted that will develop the thought, as the pressure of the hand, a nod of the head
or a glance of the eye.
As is evident from every day experience, even persons who are able to speak often communicate not only
with spoken words but also by various nods and gestures. A nod of assent impliedly adopts the words used in
the question.

1Lawman v Maharashtra, (2002) 6 SCC 710, the Supreme Court has held that “a dying declaration can be
oral or in writing.”
278 Kentucky 382: