What is Dying Declaration?
Whereas in English Law, the dying declaration requires following_
(a) person making statement is on death bed;
(b) he has reasonable apprehension that he is about to die; or
(c) he is completely disappointed from the wish to live; and
(d) he had died after such statement.
In India, the fourth condition is required to be fulfilled. Here, apprehension of death is not required.
There is a good case of 'Pakalanarayan Swami Vs. Emperor (A.I.R. 1939 Р.С. 47) in this matter. On 20th March, 1937 the deceased Kuri Nakuraju said to his wife that he is going to Behrampur because the wife of accused appellant had called him to receive the due amount. On 21st March, 1937 Nakuraju left for Behrampur. On 23rd March, 1937 the body of deccased Nakuraju
was found in a box in a coach of train. This box was bought for theappellant.
Privy Council admitted the statements said by the deceased to his wife as dying declaration-"He is going to Behrampur on the invitation of the accuser's wife, because it reflects those circumstances of the transactions which resulted in the death of Nakuraju.
Where the deceased himself dictated the F.I.R. to the police and the same was read over to him and he put his thumb impression on it, the Supreme Court held the F.I.R. to be admissible as a dying declaration. (Dharam Pal versus State of Uttar Pradesh, A.I.R 2008 S.C. 920).
Essential Conditions-
The following elements are essential for the relevancy of dying declaration-1. Person making Statement Dies
The first condition of applicability of Section 32(1) is that- the person making the statement dies. If such person does not die then his statement shall not be relevant as dying declaration. Such statements shall then be proved by his presence before the Court.If a statement has become relevant due to death of that person then it is to be proved that the person has died or not alive.
It is not necessary for the admissibility of the dying declaration that the death occurred immediately after such declaration. Such statements cannot be rejected merely on the grounds of death after some days. (Maniben versus State of Gujarat, A.L.R. 2007 S.C.1932)
(2) Statement must relate to the causes of death-
The second condition for the applicability of Section 32(1) is that such statement must relate to the causes of death. If the statements ate not related to the causes of death, then they will not be admitted as evidence.In the case of 'Jayendra Saraswati Swamigal versus State of Tamil Nadu (A.IR. 2005 S.c. 716), it has been stated by the Supreme Court that for the applicability of dying, declaration, statement of deceased should be related to the causes of his death or as to any of the circumstances of the transaction which resulted in his death.
Illustration -
In a ase in which a girl was raped. Immediately after rape, she committed suicide by herself. The statements made in relation to rape were not held relevant, because rape was not the cause of death. (Narayan Singh's Case A.I.R 1962 S.C. 237).
Similarly in another case, a woman was raped. That woman committed suicide after three days of the rape. The statement made in relation to rape were not held relevant, because there was no relation of that with the death. (Koppeviyah's Case, A.I.R. 1932 Madras 233),
3. Circumstances of Transaction must result in his death-
The third condition for the applicability of Section 32(1) is that the statement must relate to such circumstances of the transaction which resulted in death. In other words it can be said that if the statement is related to such circumstances of the transaction which results in the death of the person making it, it will be admitted as evidence.The case of "Pakala Narayana Swami versus Emperor (A.I.R. 1939 P.C. 47) is an illustrative example of it.
In a case, a woman received injuries during robbery in a house. Before death, she makes a statement of those circumstances in which robbery occured. Her statement is admitted in evidence, although the cause of death was not robbery but the injuries received during robbery. (Dannu Singh's case, A.I.R. 1925 Allahabad 227).
4. Question of death is under consideration-
The fourth condition for the applicability of Section 32(1) is that the question as to the death of the person making statement is pending during proceeding. In other words, it can be said that the proceeding must be such in which the question as to the death of the person making statement is pending. The proceeding may be civil or criminal.Thus in the above circumstances the statements of dying declaration are relevant in evidence.
Evidencary Value
Dying declaration is considered as an evidence of weak nature. Many times, it is being said that the statement making dying declaration have lost their reliability and importance. Several times question also arises that whether any person can be convicted merely on the basis of dying declaration.
There are several matters in which it has been held that if the court is satisfied on the truthiness of the dying declaration, then it can convict the accused merely on this ground.
In the case of Darshan Singh versus State of Punjab (A.I.R. 1983 S.C. 584), it has been stated by the Supreme Court that the conviction on the basis of dying declaration must require that the statements at least inspire confidence so that they can be completely relied.
Exactly the same view has been expressed in the case of State of Maharashtra verşus Sanjay D. Rajhans (A.I.R. 2005 S.C 97). Under it, it has been held by the Supreme Court that "Dying declaration should be of such nature as to inspire full confidence .
In a case, the medical report indicated burns due to accident and at other places due to self burning. In response to the questions made regarding advice, the dying declaration stated that she burnt herself after getting fed up from dowry demand. Such statements were held to be doubtful and therefore not admitted. (Sheikh Mehboob versus State of Maharashtra, A.I.R. 2005 S.C. 1805.)
Where the statements of dying declaration are being ratified by other evidences they are considered relevant in the evidence (Nabbab Ali versus State of Uttar Pradesh, A.I.R. 1994 S.C. 1607).
But, such dying declarations are not admitted which neither contain the date nor the time.The signature of deceased was neither taken nor it's explanation was given. (State of Uttar Pradesh versus Shishupal Singh A.1.R. 1994 S.С. 129.)
Difference from English Law
There is difference between English law and Indian law regarding dying declaration. In English law, the dying declaration requires that they must have been made when the person making it had reasonable apprehension of his death whereas in Indian law it is not required. Indians law requires that the person making statement dies.In the case of 'B. Shashikala versus State of Andhra Pradesh (A.I.R. 2004 S.C. 616), it has been stated by the Supreme Court that, "For the admissibility of dying declaration it is not necessary that statement of dying declaration is made in expectation of death.
No comments:
Post a Comment