IMPORTANCE OF DYING DECLARATION: INDIAN SCENARIO

A dying man seldom lies.

By Ritwik Ghosh

Dying declaration is a written or verbal statement (or in gesture) based on pertinent facts made
by a person who died explaining the cause of his death. Section 32(1) of the Indian Evidence
Act,1872 recognizes the principle of Leterm Mortem which means words before death, the
section states “When the statement is made by a personas to the cause of his death, or as to any
of the circumstances of the transaction which resulted in his death, in cases in which the cause of
that person's death comes into question. Such statements are relevant whether the person who
made them was or was not, at the time when they were made, under expectation of death, and
whatever may be the nature of the proceeding in which the cause of his death comes into
question”.
Nemo moriturus proesumitur mentri is the legal maxim, based on which dying declaration is
accepted as an evidence in the proceeding of the court, the maxim means that a man will not
meet his maker with a lie in his mouth.
ESSENTIALS OF DYING DECLARATION
• Relevance- the statement in the declaration should have a connection with the cause of
death failing to which will lead to non-acceptability in the Court.
• Competence- the declarant should be competent enough to give a dying declaration.
• Consistency- If the statement is inconsistent with the facts of the case it loses the
evidentiary value.
• Free Thought- This means the statements made the deceased should be free from any
influence.
• If the declaration is incomplete, it will not be admitted if the statement cannot answer the
relevant questions that are necessary to prove acquisition.
• A medical certificate proving that the deceased can understand the meaning of the
statement he makes.
FORMS OF DYING DECLARATION
Dying Declaration can be recorded in many ways, for instance in the case of Queen vs. Abdullah,
the magistrate recorded the ‘affirmative signs’ made by the victim and the same was used as
evidence to convict the accused. In the famous Nirbhaya Rape Case the dying declaration made
by the victim to the sub divisional magistrate was mostly by gestures or signs, therefore it can be
concluded that gesture or sign as a form of dying declaration is allowed as evidence by the
courts.
A declaration given orally at the time of death is acceptable in evidence as a special case in
contrary to the general rule of evidence in the eyes of law. In a Supreme Court judgement is was
decided that a statement(s) made prior to the incident can be taken as a dying declaration if the

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3867513

court believes that there exists enough nexus between the said statement and the death of the
person, in other words the circumstances mentioned in the statements should have some
proximate effect in the death of the declarant.
Incomplete dying declaration is not admissible in the court of law, but if the deceased has
delivered all the necessary information, it cannot be excluded merely because it is incomplete in
respect of certain facts.
In case of Munnu Raja vs. State of M.P.the Supreme Court observed that the statement made by
an injured person recorded as an FIR can be admitted in the court of law, as dying declaration
under section 32 of Indian Evidence Act. In case of multiple dying declarations it is very
important that the statements made by the victim are in relation with the facts of the case, and
there should be regularity in all the declarations.
FITNESS- AN IMPORTANT PHENOMENON
Hon’ble Justice R.C. Lahoti in Smt. Laxmi vs. Om Prakash and Others laid down the test for the
reliability of dying declaration the judgment said that the length of the statement does not matter,
the important factor here is a ‘fit state of mind’, if the court finds that the narrating capacity of
the victim is impaired so as to the state the fact of occurrence, or if the court is in suspicion
about the mental state of the victim while conveying the declaration the court can deny to act on
it.
In absence of a medical certificate by the medical officer certifying that the deceased was
medically fit to make a statement, the oral dying declaration made by the deceased to her mother
was refused in the case of State of Orissa vs. Parasuram Naik.

PERSON WHO CAN RECORD THE STATEMENT

Section 164 of Cr.P.C. empowers the magistrate to record the dying declaration irrespective of
the fact whether he has jurisdiction over that case or not, but any person can record the dying
declaration made by the deceased, but the person should have some relation with the victim
either circumstantially or by fact, he should also establish the fact that the victim was mentally fit
state to give the statement. The declaration taken by a doctor, or a police officer holds more
value than a normal person.
SIGNIFICANCE AND RELIABILITY OF DYING DECLARATION
The conviction of the accused is possible if this statement made by the diseased is enough to
establish the identity of the accused, the Supreme Court held that if the declaration holds the crux
of the matter to ascertain what had actually happened it is enough to prove conviction.
The significance of the dying declaration under the Indian law can be understood through the
case of K.R. Reddy vs Public Prosecutor, it says that the working and the admissibility off
section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act, is the assumption that a person who is going to face death
and meet his maker will not greet him with a lie on his lips. After the court satisfies all its
conditions from fitness of mind to the rest other factors, the court can decide conviction on the
basis of the statement even in absence of corroboration.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3867513

COMPARISON OF INDIAN LAW WITH THE ENGLISH LAW
Under the English law it is very important to satisfy some conditions for the consideration of
dying declaration as an evidence firstly it is important Jack the declarant should be in actual
danger of death while conveying his statement. Secondly the declarant should have a full
apprehension that his death is near, Lastly the death must be confirmed whereas in Indian
scenario the expectation of actual death by the declarant is not required.
Also another important difference that separates the English law from the Indian law is under the
English law dying declaration cannot be used as an evidence in any civil case or criminal case
except for the exclusive charge of homicide, whereas in the Indian domain it can be used for both
civil and criminal cases.
DYING DEPOSITION
A deposition is recorded by the magistrate in the presence of a lawyer of the accused the comma
the presence of the magistrate is a must as it is an essential requirement for it to be a deposition,
also in deposition cross examination by the lawyer of the accused can be done whereas a cross
examination is not allowed in the case of bank declaration however deposition has a superior
value then declaration but as of now there is no such provision regarding dying deposition in
India.
GOVERNING PRINCIPLES
The principles governing dying declaration, as summed up by the courts in different cases are as
under:
(i) There is neither rule of law nor of prudence that dying declaration cannot be acted upon
without corroboration. [Mannu Raja vs. State of Madhya Pradesh,(1976) 2 SCR 764.]
(ii) If the Court is satisfied that the dying declaration is true and voluntary it can base conviction
on it, without corroboration. [State of Uttar Pradesh v.Ram Sagar Yadav, AIR 1985 SC 416 and
Ramavati Devi v. State of Bihar, AIR 1983 SC164.]
(iii) This Court has to scrutinize the dying declaration carefully and must ensure that the
declaration is not the result of tutoring, prompting or imagination. The deceased had opportunity
to observe and identify the assailants and was in a fit state to make the declaration. [Ram
Chandra Reddy vs. Public Prosecutor, AIR 1976 S.C.1994.]
(iv) Where dying declaration is suspicious it should not be acted upon without corroborative
evidence. [Rasheed Beg v. State of Madhya Pradesh, (1974) 4 S.C.C. 264.]
(v) Where the deceased was unconscious and could never make any dying declaration the
evidence with regard to it is to be rejected. [Kake Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 1982
S.C. 1021.]
(vi) A dying declaration which suffers from infirmity cannot form the basis of conviction. [Ram
Manorath vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, 1981 SCC (Crl.) 531.]

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3867513

(vii) Merely because a dying declaration does not contain the details as to the occurrence, it is
not to be rejected [State of Maharashtra v. Krishnamurthi Laxmipati Naidu, AIR 1981 SC 617.]
If it is a brief statement, it is not to be discarded. On the contrary, the shortness of the statement
itself guarantees truth. [S M Ali, Surajdeo Ojha v. State of Bihar, 1979 Cri.LJ 1122]
(viii) Normally the court in order to satisfy whether deceased was in a fit mental condition to
make the dying declaration look up to the medical opinion. But where the eyewitness has said
that the deceased was in a fit and conscious state to make this dying declaration, the medical
opinion cannot prevail. [Nanhau Ram and another vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 1988 SC
912.]
(ix) If the deceased remained alive for a long period of time after the incident and died after
recording of the declaration, it may show that his condition was not overtly critical or precarious
when the declaration was recorded. [K.S. Radhakrishnan, Munnawar vs. State of Uttar Pradesh,
(2010) 5 SCC 451.]
(x) Where the prosecution version differs from the version as given in the dying declaration, the
said declaration cannot be acted upon. [State U.P. vs. Madan Mohan, AIR 1989 S.C. 1519 and
Sharda vs. State of Rajasthan, (2010) 2 SCC 85.]
(xi) When they are more than one dying declarations of the same person, they have to be read as
one and the same statement for proper appreciation of the value and, if they differ from each
other on material aspects, effort should be made to see if they could be reconciled. The court has
to consider each of them in its correct perspective and satisfy itself as to which one of them
reflects the true state of affairs. In case, they are inconsistent, the Court must rely upon other
evidence, if available, as it is not safe to act only on inconsistent dying declarations and convict
the accused. [Lella Srinivasa Rao vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, (2004) 9 SCC 713, Heeralal vs.
State of Madhya Pradesh, (2009) 12 SCC 671 and Kundala Bala Subramanyan vs. State of
Andhra Pradesh, (1993) 2 SCC 684.]
CONCLUSION
“…Why should I then be false, since it is true
That I must die here and live hence by truth”
-Shakespeare
All the above points can be summarised in a single Supreme Court case, Smt. Paniban vs. State
of Gujrat, where it laid several guiding principles regarding dying declaration by citing
previously decided cases. The main belief of dying declaration revolves around the principle that
a man who is at his death bed has parted ways with all the desires and interest, therefore he
seldom lies.
Dying Declaration is a significant piece of evidence. It may be the last and most pertinent
available evidence concerning the commission of a crime. Accordingly, the law of evidence
makes it relevant as well as admissible. It is also substantive evidence against the accused and a
conviction can be based solely on a dying declaration. Given the importance attached to dying

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3867513

declaration, the courts have evolved various principles to guide it. It is important that the dying
declaration should be free from errors, manipulations and modifications. It should strike to be
genuine, free from all doubts, stating the true story of the maker. In case the court entertains any
doubt with regard to the same, it is imperative for the court to look into corroborative evidences
to test the truthfulness of the dying declaration. In case no such evidence is available, the court
should reject the dying declaration. It is the duty of the court to consider dying declaration in is
correct perspective and satisfy itself of its truthfulness before it can proceed to convict an
accused.

REFERENCES
Legislative Acts
• Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Act 1 of 1872, enacted by The Governor General Council,
1872.
• Code Of Criminal Procedure,1973, enacted by the Parliament, 1973.
Case Laws
❖ Amar Munna Singh vs. State of Madras, Appeal (Cr.) 97 of 2006
❖ Munnippan vs. State of Madras, AIR 1962 SC 1252
❖ Munna Raja & another vs. State of M.P 1976 AIR 2199,1976 SCR(2) 764
❖ Smt. Laxmi vs. Om Prakash and Others AIR 2001 SC 2383
❖ State of Orissa vs. Parasuram Naik AIR 1997 (SC) 3569
❖ Pakala Narayana Swami vs. Emperor (1939) 41 BOMLR 428
❖ Queen vs. Abdullah (1885) ILR 7All 385.
❖ Mannu Raja vs. State of Madhya Pradesh,(1976) 2 SCR 764.
❖ State of Uttar Pradesh vs.Ram Sagar Yadav, AIR 1985 SC 416.
❖ Ramavati Devi vs. State of Bihar, AIR 1983 SC164.
❖ Ram Chandra Reddy vs. Public Prosecutor, AIR 1976 S.C.1994.
❖ Rasheed Beg v. State of Madhya Pradesh, (1974) 4 S.C.C. 264.
❖ Kake Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 1982 S.C. 1021.
❖ Ram Manorath vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, 1981 SCC (Crl.) 531.
❖ State of Maharashtra v. Krishnamurthi Laxmipati Naidu, AIR 1981 SC 617.
❖ S M Ali, Surajdeo Ojha v. State of Bihar, 1979 Cri.LJ 1122.
❖ Nanhau Ram and another vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 1988 SC 912.
❖ K.S. Radhakrishnan, Munnawar vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2010) 5 SCC 451.
❖ State U.P. vs. Madan Mohan, AIR 1989 S.C. 1519.
❖ Sharda vs. State of Rajasthan, (2010) 2 SCC 85.
❖ Lella Srinivasa Rao vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, (2004) 9 SCC 713.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3867513

❖ Heeralal vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2009) 12 SCC 671.
❖ Kundala Bala Subramanyan vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, (1993) 2 SCC 684.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3867513