1

BANGALORE UNIVERSITY
University Law College and Department of Studies in Law
Jnana Bharathi Campus
Bangalore-560 056

LAW OF MEDICINE

Assignment topic
On

DYING DECLARATION

Submitted to

Mr. Vineeth Sham Bhat

Guest Faculty
University Law College and Department of Studies in Law
Jnana Bharathi Campus
Bangalore-560 056

Submitted By

Name: Meha Jain

Registered Number:20LUL12027
th
8 Semester 5 Year B.A, LL. B (Hons)
University Law College and Department of Studies in Law
Jnana Bharathi Campus
Bangalore-560 056

2024
 2

TOPIC: DYING DECLARATION

I. INTRODUCTION

Dying declaration is admitted as evidence under Section 32(1) of Evidence

Act,1872. The section describes what class of statements of relevant facts made by
persons which can’t be called as witnesses can be proved. The principle on which
dying declaration is admitted is stipulated in the legal maxim “Nemo moritururus
praesumitur mentiria”- man will not meet his maker with a lie in his mouth. This
principle is based on the fact that a dying man would not falsely implicate an
innocent person. But it to be noted, that an oath and cross- examination is not
possible in such cases and so before relying on dying declaration or admitting such
statement as legal evidence the court must invoke full confidence as held in the case
of K. Ramachandra Reddy vs. Public Prosecutor 1and should not be a result of
prompting, tutoring or a product of imagination.

II. MEANING AND ESSENTIALS OF DYING DECLARATION

The Section 32 and 33 of the Indian Evidence Act provides an exception to the
hearsay rule. Section 32(1) is one of that exception under which a statement of
deceased is admissible if it is related to cause of his death or the circumstances
which resulted in his death, in a case when cause of death of such person is in
question. Such statement is called as ‘dying declaration’.
Section 32(1) provides “When a statement is made by a person as to 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 make them was or was not, at the
time when they were made under expectation of death or and whether may be
nature of the proceeding in which the cause of his death comes into question.”

Essentials of the Dying Declaration to be relevant

• Person making statement must die and cause of his death is in question
before the Court
A dying declaration is a statement made by a person in the event that his
death is "questionable" as to "the cause of his death" or "the circumstances
which resulted in his death."
Either homicide or suicide may have been the cause of death. Thus, in the
event that an individual survived after making such a proclamation; it is not
a declaration of death. A statement of death is a proclamation of death.
Consequently, in order for the statement to be used as a "dying declaration"
under section 2(1), the maker's death must be established before the court.
If the individual in question lived after making a "dying declaration," such

1
1976 (3) SCC 618
 3

remark could subsequently be used to support or refute that person's

testimony in accordance with Section 157 of the Indian Evidence Act.

• Statement must relate to the cause of his death or the circumstances of

the transaction which resulted his death

The expression ‘cause of death’ is concerned with reason of the death of the
person making the statement.
For example, A makes a statement that B assaulted him with spear and died.
Such statement of A is admissible as ‘dying declaration’ in the case where cause
of death of A is in question. The immediate death is not required, If A dies after
some time, it don’t affect the nature of ‘dying declaration’ because cause of the
death was the injury given by the B.
As held in Moti Singh v State of UP2 the death of the person making statement
caused by the injury he received in the incident for which accused is being
prosecuted. If death is caused by any other reason, such statement would not be
admissible as dying declaration. For example, A was tried for the murder of B.
B narrated the story of his death to the Police. But in medical examination the
reason of the death was’ tetanus’. The statement of the B is not admissible as
dying declaration.
There are many uses for the phrase "circumstances of the transaction which
resulted in his death." It covers all "proximate relation to the actual
occurrence" and is not limited to "caused the death of the maker of
statement." For instance, a claim made by the Statements made by the
deceased indicating that he was heading to the location where he was
actually killed, or explaining why he was going to a specific location or
meeting a specific person, are all considered dying declarations because they
contain information about the "circumstances of the transaction which
resulted in his death"3 as highlighted in the case of Pakla Naraiyan Swamy.
In the case of Sharda Birdhi Chand v State of Maharastra 4 where a
married woman had been writing to her parents and other relatives about her
critical condition at the hands of her inlaws. She lost her life after four
months later. Her letters were held to be admissible as dying declaration.
• Statement can be made with or without expectation of death
It doesn't matter if the statement was made before the deceased had any
reason to expect death, before the cause of death was mentioned, or before
the deceased had any injury or incident that directly related to the cause or
occasion of the deceased's death.
For instance, where the question at hand was whether A had killed B. B's
admission prior to the assault, stating that A had stolen money and jewellery

2
AIR 1964 SC 900
3
(1939) 41 BOMLR 428
4
AIR 1984 SC 1622
 4

from him and that he was heading there to make a demand, is acceptable as
a final will and testament.

III. FORMS OF DYING DECLARATION

Although there isn't a set format for a dying statement, it is vital that it include all
of the necessary information. A final will and testament may be given orally or in
writing, and any suitable means of communication, including signing, or another
will work as long as the indication is clear and affirmative. A deathbed declaration
does not have to be made to a magistrate in accordance with the law, and there is
no set statutory form that must be used to make such a statement. As a result, each
unique case's facts and circumstances will determine what evidentiary value or
weight should be given to a particular statement.

IV. EVIDENTIARY VALUE OF DYING DECLARATION

Dying declaration is an admissible in evidence being hearsay as an exception to the

general rule of evidence that hearsay evidence is not admissible. Admissibility of
dying declaration is based on the maxim “Nemo Moriturus Prassumttur Mentire”
which means the man will not meet with his maker with a lie in his mouth.
In Ravi Kumar v State of Tamil Nadu5 it was held by the Supreme Court that
dying declaration is admissible upon the consideration that declarant has made it in
extremity when maker is at the point of death and when every hope of this world is
gone, when every motive of the falsehood is silence and mind is induced by the
most powerful consideration to speak the truth.
The final statement is therefore taken very seriously as proof. However, since the
maker of the deathbed declaration is not susceptible to cross-examination, the court
always scrutinizes it to ensure that it is of a nature that the court finds inspiring in
its accuracy. One could argue that Court must be convinced that the deathbed
declaration is not the result of guidance, inspiration, or favorable circumstances.
Further, it is not absolute rule of law that a dying declaration cannot form sole basis
of conviction unless corroborated. The rule requiring corroboration is rule of
prudence in the case of Panneerselvam v State of Tamil Nadu6 . A dying
declaration which is truthful, consistent, coherent and without any infirmity don’t
need corroboration.
In Paniben v State of Gujarat7 Supreme court laid down certain guidelines while
dealing with dying declaration. With all mentioned above about the evidentiary
value of dying declaration it is held that
(i) In case dying declaration is suspicious it should not be acted upon
without corroboration.
(ii) Dying declaration which surfers from infirmity cannot be the basis of
conviction.

5
AIR 2006 SC 1448

6
(2008) 17 SCC 190
7
AIR 1992 SC 1817
 5

(iii) Merely the dying declaration does not contain details, is short, is not be
discarded.
(iv) Where there is more than one version of dying declaration, the first in
point of time be preferred. Where the dying declaration is incomplete by
the reason of death but clear and makes a clear accusation against the
accused, it can be relied for conviction.

V. EXCEPTION TO DYING DECLARATION

A statement made by the deceased cannot always be admissible and so some exceptions
to the dying declaration can be observed.

• Cause of death of deceased not in question.

If a statement made by a deceased prior to his death does not involve the cause of
his death or includes anything except the cause of the death such dying declaration
cannot be said to be admissible as evidence. Therefore, unless the dying declaration
would fall within the scope of Section 32(1) of the Indian Evidence Act, there is no
other provision under which the same can become admissible. In order to make the
statement must be as to the cause of her death or as to any of the circumstances of
the transactions which resulted in her death. Succinctly, the expression “any of the
circumstances of the transaction which resulted in his death” is wider in scope than
the expression “the cause of his death”. The words “resulted in his death doesn’t
mean “caused his death.

• Declarer is not a competent witness

A dying declaration which is admissible as evidence has to come by a

competent person. In the case of Ramanathan v Murugappa it was
observed that the deceased must have personal knowledge of the fact that
he was stating. In the case of Bhagwan Das v. State of Rajasthan8, the
court held that If the court finds that the capacity of the maker of the
statement to narrate the facts was impaired or the court may in the absence
of corroborative evidence lending assurance to the contents of the
declaration refuse to act on it. A dying declaration of a child is also
inadmissible in the court of law. A dying declaration made by an unsound
mind cannot be relied upon.

• Contradictory statement

When there is a presence of multiple dying declarations and all the

declarations are contradictory then it is permissible decline evidentiary
value to all the declarations.

8
AIR 1957 SC 589
 6

VI. CONCLUSION

With the above-mentioned cases and discussion, it can be concluded that dying
declaration is of importance in the eyes of law and sometimes the sole evidence to
bring to aggrieved. It can be concluded that a statement made under dying
declaration requires precision and delicate care while noting down. A dying
declaration is supposed to be true and voluntary and when this part is fulfilled a
dying declaration without corroboration can be admitted.
LORD EYRE, C.B., also held that “The principle on which this species of evidence is admitted
is, that they are declarations made in extremity, when the party is at the point of death, and
when every hope of the world is gone, when every motive to falsehood is silenced, and the
mind is induced by the most powerful considerations to speak the truth. A situation so solemn
and awful is considered by the law as creating an obligation equal to that which is imposed by
the law as creating an obligation equal to that which is imposed by a positive oath administered
in the court of justice.”

VII. BIBLIOGRAPHY
• THE LAW OF EVIDENCE -BATUK LAL
• THE LAW OF EVIDENCE -RATANLAL AND DHEERAJLAL