CENTRAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH BIHAR, GAYA -823001

School of Law and Governance

TOPIC: DYING DECELARTION

SUPERVISOR:

Dr. Deo narayan sir.

(ASSISTANT PROFESSOR)

SubmittedBy:

Roushan Kumar

B.A. LLB (Hons.)

Sixth Semester (2018-23)

Enrollment ID: CUSB1813125083

1
Page
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Writing a project after a research is never an easy task to perform. It is one of the most
significant academic challenges. Though this project is presented by me yet there are various
other persons who remain in veil and gave all the possible support to complete this project. This
project is a result of hard work incorporated by immense dedication and moral support. I, hereby,
would like to first thanks to my professor Dr. Dev narayan sir who has given me an opportunity
to work on this specified project. Due to his support only, I have successfully completed this
project. Secondly, I would like to add a vote of thanks to my friends with whom I discussed the
problem and got to understand the right methodology to be adopted to accomplish the task.
Moreover, there have also been various other factors that helped me complete this paper. I ask to
forgive me for any mistakes in the paper. At last I wholeheartedly thank all those who have stood
there for me every time and supported me.

Thank You.

ROUSHAN KUMAR

6th semester

Enrollment no. – CUSB1813125083

2
Page
INTRODUCTION

The history of Law of Evidence can be traced back to three different eras; the Ancient Hindu era,
the Muslim era and finally the British era. The conception and codification of the Indian
Evidence Act of 1872 was done during the British rule, wherein principles of English law of
evidence were followed by the presidency courts by the virtue of the Royal Charter.The Courts
operated unchecked and remained largely ungoverned in the matter of admission of evidence.
The mofussil Courts, due to the absence of rules governing evidence were reduced to chaos and
resulted into failure of justice. It became imperative to codify the laws of evidence. The first
attempt to codify was done in 1835. Subsequently eleven enactments were passed between 1835
and 1853. However they were broadly deemed inadequate, as it failed to seize the archaic
practices of mofussil Courts. In 1868, Sir Henry Mayne prepared a draft bill but it was later
abandoned as it was considered unsuitable for a country like India. Finally, Sir James Fitz James
Stephen prepared a new draft which was passed as Act 1 of 1892. On 1 st September, 1872,“The
evidenceAct”commenced. The object of the Evidence act was to establish uniformity of rules and
prevent laxity in the admissibility of evidence. The main principles that resonate in the act are;
evidence must relate to the relevant facts of the case, best evidence to be put forth and hearsay
evidence not admissible. After the enactment of the statute, the principle of exclusion of
evidence has to be applied strictly and cannot be relaxed at the discretion of the court. The
entire corpus juris( body of laws) can be broadly divided into two categories: Substantive law
and Procedural law. It is evident from the bare reading of the text and application of the same
that the Law of Evidence would come under the purview of adjective law, with, retrospective
effect. Law of evidence supplements substantive law, as it governs the pleadings and procedure.
It further provides the procedure to bring forth the relevant facts before the court, evidence to
support the facts, proceedings of the court and how to establish burden of proof.  Thus, it can be
concluded that law of evidence deals with the rights as well as procedure. 

Dying declaration 

The term dying declaration is derived from ” Leterm Mortem”, which means “Words before
death”. The basis “dying declaration” is derived from the Latin maxim “Nemo moriturus
praesumitur mentire”, which implies” a man will not meet his maker with a lie in his mouth”.  In
the case of Ulka Ram v. State of Rajasthan 1, it was held that, when a statement is made by a
person pertaining to the cause of his death or circumstances leading to his death, such a
statement is admissible in court and are compendiously called dying declaration.As per Section
32 of the Indian Evidence, dying declaration is the exception to the general rule of hearsay which
renders the evidence inadmissible in Court. A dying declaration is considered credible and
trustworthy evidence based upon the general belief that most people who know that they are
about to die do not lie. A victim is an exclusive eye witness, thus the evidence cannot be
excluded. There is no requirement as per Indian Law for the victim to be under expectation of
3
Page

1
Uka Ram v. State of Rajasthan, A.I.R. 2001 S.C. 1814.
imminent death. If the victim survives, the statement can be used to corroborate or contradict
him in court; however survival diminishes the weight of the statement.

What constitutes a dying declaration

As per Section 32, a statement can be written or verbal of the relevant facts made by a person

(a)Who is dead?

 (b)Who cannot be found,

 (c)Who has become incapable of giving evidence,

(d)Whose attendance cannot be procured without an amount of delay or expanse,

When it relates to the cause of his death; When it is made in the course of the business; When it
is against the pecuniary or propriety interest of the person making it; When it gives opinion as to
public right or custom or matters; When it relates to the existence of any relationship; When it is
contained in any deed, will, or other document; When it is made by several persons and
expresses relevant feelings to matter in question.

Who can record a dying declaration

Ideally, a dying declaration is to be recorded by Special Executive Magistrate, who is also

required to ascertain whether the victim is in a condition to record his/her statement. A doctor is
required to provide a fitness certificate to support the findings. However even with the absence
of the fitness certificate, the declaration can still be considered reliable and truth worthy, given
the victim was in a fit condition to make the statement.  If the statement made by the victim lack
the signature of the deceased and no explanation is given for the same, conviction cannot be
based on it.

Dying declaration recorded by a doctor or a police officer

Wherein a dying declaration was recorded by a doctor in the form of question and answers in the
presence of another witness, it was held that it was sufficient to convict the accused. There is no
particular law that necessitates that a declaration can only be recorded by a magistrate. The
evidentiary value attached to such statements; depend on the facts and circumstances of each
case. A dying declaration recorded by a police officer attracts suspicion but it is not a ground for
inadmissibility. However, during emergencies it can be recorded without calling a doctor or
magistrate. A clear and corroborated declaration cannot be rejected on the grounds that were
recorded by a police officer. The Court is more cautious when they review dying declaration
4

recorded by police officers.

Page
Dying declaration made to a relative

In a matter of dowry death, it was held that dying declaration cannot be rejected simply on the
grounds that it was made to a relative. The Court is more cautious when they review such
declaration.

Delay in the recording of dying declaration

Where there was a delay in recording of the dying declaration, as the victim was not in fit
condition to give a statement. The declaration was considered reliable.

FIR as a dying declaration

In the case of K. Ramachand Reddy v. Public Prosecutor 2, when an injured person filed an FIR
and subsequently died. The FIR was considered to the dying declaration.

Factors that lead to rejection/unreliability or inadmissibility of dying declaration:

If it is evident from the facts and circumstances of the case, that the victim was tutored by his
friends and family, the declaration can be rejected. However, presence of friends and family of
the deceased before the statement is recorded does not automatically render it inadmissible. If
there are multiple dying declarations with inconsistencies pertaining to relevant facts of the case,
cause of death, factor leading to the death of the accused or name and identities of the accused
would lead to rejection of the declaration. If it is not signed by the victim, there were no
witnesses present and no probable reason for the same was given, it would be considered an
incomplete dying declaration and would not be reliable. When the doctor’s report concludes that
the victim was unfit and incapable of giving a reliable statement. If a part of a declaration is
considered untrue, if it can be separated, the remaining would be admissible, however if the
untrue part cannot be separated, the declaration would be considered unreliable. There are certain
conditions for dying declaration to be considered eligible. The Court has to be convinced that the
person whose statement was recorded is dead or cannot be found or has been incapable or giving
evidence or unreasonable delay or expense is involved in producing him. Statements made by an
unsound person,contradictory statement and incomplete statement makes dying declaration.

Evidentiary value of a dying declaration

In the case of Kusa v. State of Orissa,3 the Supreme Court stated that a dying declaration is
judged on its own platform and conviction can be based solely on it. However, it is imperative
for the Court to scrutinize the statement and look at mitigating facts and circumstances before
basing the conviction on dying. In the case of  K.R. Reddy v. Public Prosecutor4, the Court stated
2
K. Ramachandra Reddy v. Public Prosecutor,
1976 AIR 1994 1976 SCR 542 1976 SCC (3) 618
5

3
Kuka v. State of Orissa,1980 2 S.C.C. 207
Page

4
K. Ramachandra Reddy v. Public Prosecutor 1976 AIR 1994 1976 SCR 542 1976 SCC (3) 618
that since a dying declaration is admissible as per Section 32 of the Act, it is not done under oath
nor can it be cross examined. Therefore, it is upon the court to carefully scrutinize the
declaration. The Court is required to be satisfied, that there was no element of tutoring, the
deceased was in fit state of mind and the statement was not a product of his imagination.  The
Court, while doing is required to acknowledge the solemnity and sanctity of the words of a dying
man. If and when the Court finds the declaration reliable, conviction can be based without
furthercorroboration. In Khushal Rao v. State of Bombay, 5the Court laid down the following
principles pertaining to dying to dying declaration :

(i) Conviction can be based on dying declaration, after it passes the scrutiny of the Court.

(ii) A dying declaration is judged on its own platform as evidence and it is not a weaker kind of
evidence.

(iii) It is imperative to look at the facts and circumstance in which the dying declaration was
made.

(iv) A dying declaration is most reliable when recorded by competent Magistrate in the form of
questions and answers with the signature of the victim.

(v)The Court is required to look into the circumstances when the declaration was recorded.
Whether there was sufficient light in the room, whether there was opportunity to tutor the victim,
whether the victim was in right state of mind, whether the statements were made without delay,
whether the statements are consistent with the facts of the case .

CONCLUSION
6
Page

5
Khusal Rao v. State of Bombay1958 AIR 22 1958 SCR 552
The dying declaration is not specifically mentioned in our penal law under Section 32(1) of IPC.
it is the statement made by the person who is going to die, and that statement will be considered
as evidence in court, how his death caused and who is the mugger. There are many conditions
that relied upon the dying declaration that it should be in an adequate manner as dying
declaration is the weapon who convicted the accused and stood as strong evidence. The
admissibility of dying declaration accepted in our Indian court because the law presumes that in
Leterm Mortem i.e in his last parting words the man will never lie as anyone will meet his maker
with a lie on his lips. This is because a man who is going to die, end with all his needs and wants
and his interest is no more passionate for self deeds so he seldom lies. However, the dying
declaration is found to be maliciously made then the court has the right to reject the statement.
Or there are other situations and circumstances which coupled with dying declaration for its
admissibility which discussed above.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Page
BOOKS

i) The Law of evidence by Ratanlal and Dhirajlal 24th Edition

ii) The law of Evidence by Batuklal

WEBSITES

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1810510

https://www.casemine.com/judgement

8
Page