Scribd
Upload
25 views5 pages

Admissibility of Incomplete Dying Declarations

The document discusses various aspects of dying declarations under Indian law. It states that an incomplete dying declaration cannot be admitted as evidence in court. It provides examples of dying declarations that were found to be complete and admissible, such as a statement providing the name of the attacker. The document also discusses that dying declarations can be recorded in the question-answer format, by doctors, police officers, or magistrates in some circumstances. Finally, it notes that if the declarant does not ultimately die after making the statement, the statement does not retain the same evidentiary value as a dying declaration since an expectation of death is required.

Uploaded by

ASHUTOSH PAREEK
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
25 views5 pages

Admissibility of Incomplete Dying Declarations

The document discusses various aspects of dying declarations under Indian law. It states that an incomplete dying declaration cannot be admitted as evidence in court. It provides examples of dying declarations that were found to be complete and admissible, such as a statement providing the name of the attacker. The document also discusses that dying declarations can be recorded in the question-answer format, by doctors, police officers, or magistrates in some circumstances. Finally, it notes that if the declarant does not ultimately die after making the statement, the statement does not retain the same evidentiary value as a dying declaration since an expectation of death is required.

Uploaded by

ASHUTOSH PAREEK
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

Incomplete Dying Declaration

Dying declaration made by the person, which is found to be incomplete can not
be admissible as evidence. When the condition of the deceased is grave and at
his own request a statement made by him in the presence of the doctor was
later taken by the police but could not be completed as the deceased fell into a
coma from which he could not recover. It was held that the dying declaration
was not admissible in court as the declaration appears to be incomplete on the
face of it. But the statement, though it is incomplete in the sense but conveys
the declarant all necessary information or what he wanted to state, yet stated
as complete in respect of certain fact then the statement would not be excluded
on the ground of its being incomplete.

The deceased stated, “I  was going home when I came near the house of Abdul
Majid, Sohail shot me from the bush. He ran away. I saw.” this was the dying
declaration made by the deceased and further was unable to answer the
questions. It was held that there is no question of incompleteness so far as the
context of the case is concerned. In the case of Muniappan v. State of
Madras[4]. The deceased made the dying declaration as follows :

“Sir,

This day 24th January 1960 in the afternoon at 12:30 Muniappan son kola
goundan of kamnav-kurechi stabbed me in my body with a knife.”

Soon the deceased died after the statement. His thumb impression was taken
after he was dead. This declaration against Muniappan was complete and
admissible.

Question- Answer form 


Dying Declaration can be made in the form of Question-answer. the deceased,
in some of her statement, did not state the actual part played by the appellant.
She merely answered the questions put to her. The court held that when
questions are put differently then the answer will also appear to be different. At
first glance, the detailed description of the offence may appear to be missing
but the statement of the deceased construed reasonably. However, when the
magistrate records the dying declaration, it must be preferred to be recorded in
the form of a question-answer must be preferred. If there is nothing to doubt
that the person who records the statement made by the deceased exact word to
word, would not make any difference merely because the same was not
recorded in the form of question and answer. 

A dying declaration can be recorded by a normal person. As in some


circumstances where the judicial magistrate, police officer and doctor is not
available, the Court can not reject the dying solely statement made before the
normal person. But the person who records the statement must show that the
deceased was in a fit state of mind and conscious while making the statement
no matter if the statement is not recorded by Judicial Magistrate, doctor and
police officer. The statement is admissible in a court of law.

Recorded by the doctor or a police officer


If there is no time to call the magistrate keeping in the mind the deteriorated
condition of the declarant, the statement can be recorded by the doctor or by a
police officer. But one condition must be coupled with it that while recording the
statement there shall one or two-person present there as a witness otherwise
the Court may find the statement to be suspicious. Moreover, the statement
record by the doctor, later endorses that the declarant was not in a stable
condition and his statement would not be considered as evidence, rectify by the
witness that the deceased was in a fit state of mind and conscious to make the
declaration. It was held in the case of N. Ram v. State[11] that the medical
opinion can not wipe out the direct testimony of an eye witness which states
that the deceased was in a fit mental condition and able to make a dying
declaration.
Recorded by the magistrate
When the deceased statement recorded by the competent magistrate has
deemed to be considered as reliable and attracts the evidentiary value as he
presumed to know how the dying declaration should be recorded and he is a
neutral person. Moreover, the magistrate has empowered to record the dying
declaration under 164 of Cr.P.C.

Section 164 Cr. P.C states that SubSection (1) gives power to the magistrate to
record the statement of the dying person, no matter whether he has jurisdiction
over that case or not, and in case where the statement recorded by the
magistrate who has no jurisdiction in that case subsection (6) will apply. Here
the word “statement” does not confine to only the statement by the deceased
and witness but also include a statement of the accused, in order to satisfy
himself, but the accused statement will not amount to a confession.

Subsection (1) states that: any judicial magistrate and metropolitan magistrate
shall have the power to record the dying statement made by the dying person,
whether the magistrate has jurisdiction in that particular case or not, he will be
able to record the state provided under this chapter or by any other law for the
time being enforced, or at the time before the commencement of trial and
investigation.

Section 164 provides a warning. Under this provision the magistrate who record
the statement should tell the accused that he has to made only statement which
shall not be amount to confession, but if he did so, then the confession can be
used against him for the purpose of conviction. This is the sine qua non for
recording confession. The other important requirement is that the Magistrate
must raised questions from the wrongdoer to satisfy himself that the confession
made by the accused was voluntary so as to enable him to give the requisite
certificate under subsection(4) of this chapter. The judicial magistrate here tell
the accused that he is not bound to make a confession, but he did not ask the
question from the accused in order to satisfy in question, whether the
statement made by the accused is voluntary or not.

In Mahabir Singh v. State of Haryana[12] the Court held that, Where the
Magistrate did not clear the rule that the statement made by the accused should
not be amount to confession, if he does so then it will be used as evidence
against him, can not be considered. The Magistrate must satisfy himself that the
statement made by the accused voluntary, no pressure or force was used on
the accused while making the confession. Any mark of the person of the
accused to vitiate the voluntary character of the confession. When was held not
only inadmissible under the section but it could not be used under the other
provision of Indian Evidence Act such as sections 21 & 29.

In a situation where a person dies after, when a F.I.R was lodged and stating
that his life was in danger, it is relevant to be recorded as circumstantial dying
declaration.

In the case of Munnu Raja and another v. State of M.P[16] the Supreme Court
Of India observed that statement made by injured person recorded as FIR can
be deemed as dying declaration and such declaration is admissible under
Section 32 of Indian Evidence Act. It was also observed by the court that dying
declaration must not shows the whole incident or narrate the case history.
Corroboration is not necessary in this situation, Dying declaration can be
declared as the exclusive evidence for the purpose of conviction.

If the declarant does not die

When the dying declaration given by the deceased is recorded. But the question
arises that after the dying declaration was recorded and the deceased is still
alive, was the statement holds the same effect. In that situation, the deceased
now turned to be a witness against the accused to narrate what the actual story
was. As the dying declaration itself mentioned the word dying, so it is necessary
that there must be an expectation of death on the part of the declarant.

Common questions

Powered by AI

Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. plays a crucial role in handling and ensuring the admissibility of dying declarations by outlining the procedures and powers granted to magistrates. It allows any judicial and metropolitan magistrate, regardless of their jurisdiction over the specific case, to record a dying declaration. This provision ensures that the statement is recorded by someone with legal authority and understanding of evidentiary requirements, thereby enhancing its reliability and evidentiary value . Additionally, it mandates magistrates to inform the accused of their legal rights against self-incrimination, ensuring confessions made in conjunction with dying declarations are voluntary and thus admissible .

The manner of recording a dying declaration can significantly impact its reliability and evidentiary value. When recorded by a competent magistrate, the declaration is considered reliable due to the magistrate's neutrality and understanding of the process, as they are presumed to know the correct procedure . However, if recorded by someone other than a magistrate without sufficient witness presence or if there is suspicion about the declarant's mental state, its reliability may be questioned . In some instances, if the recording is not in question-answer form, the detailed description might seem lacking, but if reasonably construed, it can still be reliable .

The condition of the declarant is crucial in determining the admissibility of a dying declaration. For it to be admissible, it must be shown that the declarant was in a fit state of mind and conscious while making the declaration, regardless of whether it was recorded by a judicial magistrate, doctor, police officer, or a normal person . If there is medical testimony or evidence indicating that the declarant was not in a suitable condition, such testimony may be challenged by witnesses who confirm the declarant's mental fitness. Otherwise, the court may deem the statement suspicious and inadmissible .

Recording a dying declaration in non-standard formats, such as not using a question-answer structure, can impact perceptions of completeness and reliability. However, if the statement captures the declarant's intended information and is reasonably construed, it is still considered valid and admissible . The courts have indicated a preference for the question-answer format due to its clarity and directness, but deviations from this do not automatically render a declaration inadmissible, as long as it effectively conveys the necessary information and there are no grounds for suspicion regarding its authenticity or the declarant's mental state .

A dying declaration might be considered inadmissible if it is incomplete on the face of it, meaning that while the declarant might have conveyed necessary information, the statement itself was not fully captured due to external circumstances, such as the declarant falling into a coma. This was exemplified in a case where the deceased was unable to complete his statement due to loss of consciousness . However, if a statement appears complete in respect of certain facts deemed necessary to the case, it may still be admissible even if it seems incomplete overall .

If a declarant survives after giving a dying declaration, the statement initially recorded as a dying declaration does not lose its significance but transforms its utility. The living declarant becomes a witness and can testify in court to narrate the factual circumstances of the event . The Indian Evidence Act does not consider these statements as dying declarations in the traditional sense, due to the absence of death—an expectation of death is inherent in the term 'dying declaration' . In such cases, the statement may still serve as evidence alongside the witness's direct testimony. This nuance illustrates how evidence law adapts based on the outcome of the declarant's health status .

When recording a confession related to a dying declaration, a magistrate must ensure that the statement is voluntary by satisfying themselves that no pressure or force was applied to the accused. The magistrate has to inform the accused that they are not obligated to make a confession and that such a confession can be used against them in court for a conviction . This includes raising questions to verify the voluntariness of the confession and providing a requisite certificate under subsection(4) to confirm these conditions were met . Failure to follow these steps can render the confession inadmissible .

A dying declaration recorded by someone other than a magistrate can be sustained as evidence if it meets several conditions: the declarant must be confirmed as being in a fit state of mind, witnessed by at least one or two people to avoid suspicion of the statement, and it must be acknowledged that there was no opportunity to obtain the presence of a magistrate due to the declarant's deteriorating condition . Additionally, while medical opinions on the declarant's condition can challenge the statement, witness testimonies claiming the declarant's mental fitness can uphold its validity .

The presence of witnesses is critical when a dying declaration is recorded by a doctor or police officer to ensure the credibility and authenticity of the declaration. Witnesses help confirm that the declarant was in a fit state of mind and that the statement was voluntarily made without coercion or external influence . This reduces the potential for the declaration to be considered suspicious or unreliable by the court. Furthermore, witnesses can provide testimony to support the conditions under which the declaration was made, particularly in challenging circumstances where a magistrate cannot be present .

In Indian law, dying declarations hold a unique position as evidence for conviction without the need for corroboration. They are considered credible because they are made under the solemnity of impending death, which preserves their authenticity . The Supreme Court of India, in cases like Munnu Raja and another v. State of M.P., highlighted that dying declarations could serve as exclusive evidence for conviction without requiring additional corroboration . This demonstrates their significant evidentiary value, contingent on the statement being clear, complete, and the mental fitness of the declarant not being in doubt . Nonetheless, courts carefully scrutinize such statements to safeguard against miscarriages of justice, given the weight they carry in legal proceedings .

You might also like