What is the meaning of 'Dying Declaration' and how reliable is it considered by the Courts?

 

Meaning of Dying Declaration

 

Indian Laws do not provide a definition of dying declaration but the same could be understood by perusing a Law Dictionary. Before adverting any further, an earlier post by me in relation to credibility of dying declaration could also be perused. Black’s Law Dictionary (8th Edition) defines ‘dying declaration’ as under: -

 

“A statement by a person who believes that death is imminent, relating to the cause or circumstances of the person’s impending death.

The statement is admissible in evidence as an exception to the hearsay rule.”

 

The relevant provision of law in this regard is Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, which reads as under: -

 

“Statements, written or verbal, of relevant facts made by a person who is dead, or who cannot be found, or who has become incapable of giving evidence, or whose attendance cannot be procured, without an amount of delay or expense which under the circumstances of the case appears to the Court unreasonable, are themselves relevant facts in the following cases: --

(1) when it relates to cause of death. - When the statement is made by a person as 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.

……..”

 

Important Judicial Precedents in relation to Reliability of Dying Declaration

 

K. Ramachandra Reddy v. Public Prosecutor, (1976) 3 SCC 618 – Once the court is satisfied that the dying declaration is true and voluntary it can be sufficient to found the conviction even without any further corroboration.

 

Khushal Rao v. State of Bombay, AIR 1958 SC 22 – In this case, some important postulates were laid down with respect to reliability of dying declarations: -

 

1. There cannot be an absolute rule of law that a dying declaration cannot form the sole basis of conviction unless it is corroborated and that is a weaker kind of evidence.

 

2. Each case is to be judged on its own merits and circumstances.

 

3. Dying declaration stands on the same footing as another piece of evidence and has to be judged in light of the circumstances.

 

4. “A dying declaration which has been recorded by a competent Magistrate in the proper manner, that is to say, in the form of questions and answers, and, as far as practicable, in the words of the maker of the declaration, stands on a much higher footing than a dying declaration which depends upon oral testimony which may suffer from all the infirmities of human memory and human character.”

 

5. The circumstances like the opportunity of the dying man for observation, whether the statement has been consistent throughout if he had several opportunities of making a dying declaration apart from the official record of it and whether the statement had been made at the earliest opportunity and was not the result of tutoring by interested parties, have to be kept in mind while testing the reliability of a dying declaration.

 

Tapinder Singh v. State of Punjab, (1970) 2 SCC 113 – “It is true that a dying declaration is not a deposition in court and it is neither made on oath nor in the presence of the accused. It is, therefore, not tested by cross-examination on behalf of the accused. But a dying declaration is admitted in evidence by way of an exception to the general rule against the admissibility of hearsay evidence, on the principle of necessity. The weak points of a dying declaration just mentioned merely serve to put the court on its guard while testing its reliability, by imposing on it an obligation to closely scrutinise all the relevant attendant circumstances.”

 

Lallubhai Devchand Shah v. State of Gujarat, (1971) 3 SCC 767 – The person who recorded the dying declaration must be satisfied that the deceased was in a fit state of mind.

 

Kundula Bala Subrahmanyam v. State of A.P., (1993) 2 SCC 684 – The Court stated that a dying declaration made by person on the verge of his death has a special sanctity as at that solemn moment, a person is most unlikely to make any untrue statement and such a dying declaration, by itself, can be sufficient for recording conviction even without looking for any corroboration. If there are more than one dying declarations, then the court has also to scrutinise all the dying declarations to find out if each one of these passes the test of being trustworthy.

 

Rule of Caution and Reliability of Dying Declarations

 

Time and again, the Hon’ble Courts have iterated that ‘Rule of Caution’ must be exercised in order to test the veracity and the reliability of dying declarations. What is this “Rule of Caution?” The same could be understood by perusing a catena of judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

 

Govindappa v. State of Karnataka, (2010) 6 SCC 533 – “…. What is essentially required is that the person who recorded the dying declaration must be satisfied that the deceased was in a fit state of mind. The certification by the doctor is essentially a rule of caution and, therefore, the voluntary and truthful nature of the declaration can be established otherwise…..”

 

Sher Singh v. State of Punjab, (2008) 4 SCC 265 – “….The court should ensure that the statement was not as a result of tutoring or prompting or a product of imagination….. What is essential is that the person recording the dying declaration must be satisfied that the deceased was in a fit state of mind….. A certificate by the doctor is essentially a rule of caution and, therefore, the voluntary and truthful nature of a statement can be established otherwise.”

 

Laxman v. State of Maharashtra, (2002) 6 SCC 710 – “…… Where it is proved by the testimony of the Magistrate that the declarant was fit to make the statement even without examination by the doctor the declaration can be acted upon provided the court ultimately holds the same to be voluntary and truthful. A certification by the doctor is essentially a rule of caution and therefore the voluntary and truthful nature of the declaration can be established otherwise.”

 

Concluding Remarks

 

The above-stated case-laws explain the test of reliability in relation to dying declarations in a succinct manner. It could be summarized as under: -

 

1. Dying Declaration is admissible in evidence as an exception to the hearsay rule.

 

2. Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, provides that statements, written or verbal, are themselves relevant facts when such statement is made by a person in relation to his death.

 

3. Conviction can be made solely on the basis of a reliable dying declaration.

 

4. Dying declaration stands on the same footing as another piece of evidence and has to be judged in light of the circumstances.

 

5. If there are more than one dying declarations, then the court has also to scrutinise all the dying declarations to find out if each one of these passes the test of being trustworthy.

 

6. Rule of Caution in relation to a dying declaration means that the Courts need to ensure that the statement is not a result of tutoring and the person recording the same must be satisfied that the deceased was in a fit state of mind.