The Principle of Dying Declaration
Mushkan Pandey
Deen Dayal Upadhayay
This Blog is written by Mushkan Pandey, a Law Graduate of Deen Dayal Upadhayay
1. Introduction
The term 'Dying Declaration' is derived from the Latin phrase 'Extremum Letem Mortem', which translates to 'words said before death'. A Dying Declaration is a statement made by a person before their death, detailing the circumstances or reasons surrounding their demise. When a person is about to die, any statement they make regarding their death or its cause is known as a Dying Declaration. A Dying Declaration can be either written or verbal, and its relevance is determined by whether it pertains to the person's death. If the declarant survives, they can testify as a witness in court, and their previous statement cannot be admitted as a dying declaration. The dying declaration is grounded in the legal principle 'Nemo Moriturus Praesumitur Mentiri,’ meaning a person about to die will not lie.' Made when all hope is lost, In the face of impending death, all incentives for falsehood are extinguished, and the mind is driven by the weightiest of considerations to speak truthfully. This solemn and serene circumstance obliges the law to accept the statement's authenticity.
The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (Section 32 (1)), initially addressed Dying Declarations. Now, this provision is covered under Section 26 (a) of the ‘Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam’, 2023.
2. To whom should the death declaration be made?
A dying declaration can be made to anyone, including Family members, Friends, Neighbours, Medical professionals (doctors, nurses), Police officers, Witnesses (bystanders, passersby) Even strangers.
Declarations made to magistrates or other judicial officers are considered more reliable and carry significant weight due to:
· Official environment lends credibility.
· Judicial officers are presumed neutral.
· Magistrates have legal authority to record statements.
3. Essentials Elements of Dying Declaration:
Following are certain conditions that are a pre-requisite to be fulfilled for a statement to be admissible as a Dying Declaration:
Form of Statement: The statement can be made orally or in writing, and even through sign language or conduct, as established in Emperor v. Abdullah.
Content of Statement: The statement must describe the circumstances of death and the series of events leading to it.
Immediacy: The statement must be made with the expectation of immediate death.
Relevance: The statement must relate to the cause of death or circumstances surrounding it.
4. Exception of Hearsay Evidence:
Hearsay evidence is an indirect statement made by a person who has not directly observed the event but is reporting what someone else said or observed. For example, "I heard someone say they saw the crime. Generally, hearsay evidence is not admissible in court because the source is not available for cross-examination. Courts prefer direct evidence from witnesses who have personally observed the facts.
Hearsay is considered unreliable as it is second-hand information and lacks direct testimony, so it cannot be thoroughly tested in court.
Key differences between Dying Declaration & Hearsay Evidence:
· Hearsay is not usually admissible, while a dying declaration is admissible as an exception.
· Hearsay comes from someone other than the direct witness, while a dying declaration is made by the person experiencing the event.
· Hearsay lacks reliability because it’s indirect, whereas a dying declaration is considered reliable due to the belief that a person near death is unlikely to lie.
5. Landmark judgement on Dying Declaration:
Pakala Narayana Swami vs Emperor AIR 1939
In this case, Pakala Narayana Swami was charged with murder after a body was found in the trunk of a train. The victim had previously been seen boarding a train to visit Pakala Narayana Swami to collect money. Before his death, the victim told his wife that he was going to Pakala Narayana Swami to retrieve the debt. The prosecution relied heavily on this statement made by the victim before his death, arguing that it indicated the circumstances leading to his murder. The central legal issue was whether the victim’s statement to his wife made before his death, could be treated as a dying declaration.
The Privy Council held that the statement made by the deceased about his intention to go to the accused’s house could be admitted as a dying declaration under Section 32(1). They interpreted Section 32(1) broadly, stating that a dying declaration is not limited only to the exact cause of death but also includes statements that reveal the circumstances surrounding the death.
Queen-Empress vs Abdullah, 1885
Abdullah was accused of causing the death of a woman, and the key piece of evidence against him was the death declaration made by the victim. The woman had been severely injured and was on her deathbed. Before dying, she made a statement implicating Abdullah in her attack. The legal question arose regarding the admissibility and credibility of her dying declaration. The core issue in this case was whether the dying declaration of the deceased, without any further corroborating evidence, could be sufficient for a conviction.
The Allahabad High Court held that a dying declaration can be relied upon even if it is not corroborated by other evidence.
The court stated that if the dying declaration appears to be truthful, voluntary, and free from external influences, it can be used as the sole basis for conviction, provided the court is fully satisfied with its reliability.
Conclusion:
Dying Declarations hold significant weight in Indian evidence law, serving as an exception to the hearsay rule. Their admissibility is rooted in the principle of necessity, recognizing the critical importance of a person's final words. Section 32(1) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, provides a comprehensive framework for Dying Declarations. This provision expertly addresses the essential criteria for considering such statements. To be admissible, a Dying Declaration must meet specific conditions. The statement must be made by the deceased, pertain to the cause or circumstances of death, and be made while the declarant was in a conscious mental state with the expectation of imminent death. Judicial evaluation of Dying Declarations requires a balanced approach. Courts exercise caution, considering the credibility and reliability of the statement, surrounding circumstances, potential corroboration, and possible biases or influences.
References:
· https://www.indiacode.nic.in/bitstream/123456789/15351/1/iea_1872.pdf
· https://www.indiacode.nic.in/handle/123456789/20063?locale=en
· https://indiankanoon.org/doc/516808/