A Hearsay Exception: Examining the Admissibility of Dying Declarations in Court

Introduction

In a court of law, the truth hinges on reliable evidence. Typically, firsthand accounts hold the most weight. However, there are exceptions to this rule. One such exception is the dying declaration, a statement made by a person who is in fear of imminent death and which relates to the cause of that impending demise.

The general rule of evidence excludes hearsay – testimony that recounts what someone else said, rather than what the witness themself observed. This is because the original speaker cannot be cross-examined, a crucial tool for testing the truthfulness of a statement. Dying declarations are a well-established exception to the hearsay rule.

What is dying declaration?

The term "leterm motem," which refers to words spoken prior to death, is the root of the word dying proclamation. It refers to the deceased person's declaration outlining the reason for their passing.

The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 does not define the phrase "dying declaration," yet it does have provisions about it in Section 32(1) of the Act.

Section 32(1) of IEA

This section states that 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. 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.

Characteristics of Dying Declaration

• One of the exceptions to the general rule that hearsay evidence is excluded is a dying pronouncement.
•  The dying declaration need not be pertinent solely in a specific type of proceeding. Both civil and criminal proceedings are possible.
•  There is no hard and fast rule in law that says a dying declaration cannot be followed if it is supported by further, independent evidence.

By Whom the Dying Declaration is Recorded

• The magistrate should record it as soon as possible.
•  Considering the state of the declaration, it can be recorded by anyone if there isn't enough time to call the magistrate.
•  It cannot be argued that a police officer's recorded dying pronouncement is always void.
•  It is preferable to have the witnesses' signatures obtained if the competent Magistrate fails to record any dying declaration. These witnesses must be present at the time of recording.

Procedure for Recording Dying Declaration

• It is not necessary for a dying declaration to be recorded exclusively by a magistrate, nor is there a certain form or method that must be followed.
•  A final will and testament cannot be rejected only because it was not entered into a question-and-answer format.
• A narrative statement captured on camera could seem more genuine and provide the injured party's authentic account of what happened.

Multiple Dying Declarations

• The law pertaining to multiple dying declarations has been established via numerous rulings rendered by the Supreme Court.
• In these situations, the veracity of such claims needs to be closely evaluated.
• Thus, there are two possible scenarios: one in which there are several death pronouncements that are consistent with one another, and the other in which there are several conflicting dying declarations.
• The court would thus have to take the degree of the contradictions into consideration in circumstances of inconsistent dying declarations.
•  It could turn out that the discrepancies are reconcilable.In situations such as these, when the discrepancies pertain to specific details or descriptions yet are incriminating in the accused's eyes, the court would review the documentation.

What is the relevance of a Dying Declaration?

A statement made by a deceased person that is only relevant to the explanation of their cause of death or any transactional event that contributed to their death is questioned.
The deceased's statement regarding that incident cannot be interpreted as a statement regarding the cause of his death or any of the details of the transaction that led to his death if it cannot be demonstrated that the injuries he sustained in the accident in which he is alleged to have died were the cause of his death. A final statement is relevant in situations where the person's cause of death is questioned.

Can conviction be solely based on dying declaration?

In this case, those observations of their Lordships were found to be ‘ obiter dicta ‘ by nature and the following guidelines are laid down in Khushal Rao c. Bombay.

1. A dying declaration can not constitute the sole basis for conviction as an absolute rule of law unless this is confirmed.
2. It has to be established on its own facts, taking into consideration the circumstances of the death declaration.
3. As a general proposition, it can not be stated that a dying statement is a weaker kind of evidence than other evidence
4. The dying statement shall be based on the same basis as other evidence and shall be judged on the basis of the circumstances surrounding it and the principles governing the assessment of the evidence.
5. A dying statement written by a competent judge, that is in the proper manner, in the questions and answers form, as far as possible, according to the declarant’s maker, is much more relevant than the dying statement, which may be affected by all the infirmities of the human memory and character, depending on oral In order to test the reliability of a dying statement, the court must consider several circumstances, such as the dying man’s opportunity for observation, etc.
6. Therefore, in order to pass the reliability test, a dying statement must be subjected to very close scrutiny, bearing in mind that the statement was in the absence of the accused, who had no opportunity to test the veracity of the statement by cross-examination. But once the court has concluded that the dying statement was the truthful version of the victim’s death circumstances and assailants, there is no further question of further corroboration. On the other hand, after examining the death statement in all its aspects and testing its veracity, the Court has concluded itself that it is not reliable by itself and that it suffers from infirmities, then it can not form the basis without corroboration of a conviction. The need for corroboration is not the inherent weakness of a death statement as evidence, but the fact that the court concluded, in a particular case, that a dying statement was not free of the above-noted infirmities or other infirmities that could be disclosed in evidence in this case.

Landmark Cases

• In the case of Uka Ram v State of Rajasthan, the Court held that, in the event that the cause of his action is questionable, a person’s statement of the cause of his death or of any circumstances of transaction that led to his death is admissible as evidence, the statement in law is categorically called the dying declaration.
• In Chirra Shivraj v State of Andhra Pradesh, the Court held that relying on the dying declaration is an extremely dangerous mechanical approach simply because it is there. The court shall examine the death declaration scrumptiously with a microscopic eye, to find out if it is voluntary, genuine, made in the conscious state of mind and without being influenced, and if such condition is fulfilled, the court held that the order of a conviction cannot be declared on the basis of sale of the dying declaration.
• In Uttar Pradesh v Madan Mohan, the court stated that it was for the court to see that the dying statement inspired complete confidence since the manufacturer of the dying statement was not available for cross-examination, the court should be satisfied that there was no possibility of tutoring or prompting, the doctor’s certificate should state that the victim was in a fit state of mind, Magistrate recording his own satisfaction with the declarant’s fit mental condition was not acceptable especially if the doctor was unavailable, the Magistrate, police officer and executive should record the dying statement only if the deceased’s condition was so precarious that no other option left.

Conclusion

Dying declarations serve a vital function in the courtroom, potentially providing a critical missing piece in cases where the victim is deceased. However, their exceptional status as hearsay evidence necessitates careful scrutiny.

Judges must ensure the declarations meet the legal requirements and acknowledge the inherent limitations. While the solemnity of death may inspire truthfulness, the absence of cross-examination and the potential for biases or external influences cannot be ignored.

Ultimately, dying declarations are a valuable but complex legal tool. Their admissibility and weight hinge on a thorough legal analysis, ensuring that these final words contribute meaningfully to the pursuit of justice.

Unlock the Potential of Legal Expertise with LegalMantra.net - Your Trusted Legal Consultancy Partner”

Article Compiled by:-

~Prerna Yadav

(LegalMantra.net Team)

Disclaimer: Every effort has been made to avoid errors or omissions in this material in spite of this, errors may creep in. Any mistake, error or discrepancy noted may be brought to our notice which shall be taken care of in the next edition In no event the author shall be liable for any direct indirect, special or incidental damage resulting from or arising out of or in connection with the use of this information Many sources have been considered including Newspapers, Journals, Bare Acts, Case Materials , Charted Secretary, Research Papers etc.