In the realm of legal proceedings, evidence serves as the cornerstone upon which the edifice of justice is constructed. Among the myriad forms of evidence, dying declarations occupy a unique and significant position, especially within the framework of the Indian legal system governed by the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

The concept of dying declarations is grounded in the belief that individuals, when confronted with the prospect of imminent death, are unlikely to deceive and are thus more inclined to speak the truth. This assignment endeavours to delve into the evidentiary value of dying declarations in the context of the Indian Evidence Act, examining its legal foundation, admissibility, reliability, limitations, and case law jurisprudence.

Legal Foundation of Dying Declarations:

The legal foundation of dying declarations can be traced back to common law principles that have evolved over centuries. At its core lies the maxim 'nemo moriturus praesumitur mentire', which translates to 'a man will not meet his Maker with a lie in his mouth'. This principle reflects the presumption that individuals, when on the brink of death, are unlikely to fabricate or distort the truth. In India, the admissibility of dying declarations is primarily governed by Sections 32 and 60 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

Admissibility of Dying Declarations under the Indian Evidence Act:

Section 32(1) of the Indian Evidence Act expressly addresses the admissibility of dying declarations. It states that statements made by a person who is dead, regarding the cause of his death or any of the circumstances leading to his death, are considered relevant facts.

Furthermore, Section 32(1)(a) provides for the admission of statements made by a person as to the cause of his death, or as to any circumstances of the transaction that resulted in his death, in cases where the statement relates to the cause of death, or the circumstances of the transaction resulting in death.

Additionally, Section 60 of the Indian Evidence Act allows for oral evidence to be given of the oral statements made by the declarant, as to the cause of his death or as to any of the circumstances of the transaction which resulted in his death.

Reliability of Dying Declarations:

While dying declarations hold significant evidentiary value, their reliability is subject to scrutiny. Several factors contribute to assessing the reliability of a dying declaration:

Key Considerations for Dying Declarations:

• Mental Capacity of the Declarant: It is essential to ascertain whether the declarant was of sound mind and capable of making a statement free from external influence or coercion.
• Voluntariness: The statement must be made voluntarily, without any duress or undue influence from external sources.
• Consciousness of Impending Death: The declarant must have been conscious of his impending death and made the statement with the awareness of its significance.
• Absence of Motive to Fabricate: Since the declarant has little to gain from falsehood at the brink of death, the absence of any ulterior motive adds to the reliability of the declaration.

Despite these considerations, it is crucial to recognize that dying declarations are not infallible and must be corroborated with other evidence wherever possible. Courts often exercise caution and scrutinize the circumstances surrounding the declaration to determine its reliability.
 

Limitations of Dying Declarations:

• Risk of Fabrication: In some cases, there may be attempts to fabricate or manipulate dying declarations for ulterior motives, thereby compromising their reliability.
• Inability to Cross-Examine: Since the declarant is unavailable for cross-examination, the opposing party may be deprived of the opportunity to test the veracity of the statement thoroughly.
• Ambiguity or Incoherence: Due to the circumstances under which they are made, dying declarations may be ambiguous or incoherent, leading to interpretation challenges.
• Absence of Corroboration: Relying solely on a dying declaration without corroborating evidence can be risky, especially in cases where the declaration is the sole basis for conviction.

It is imperative for courts to weigh these limitations carefully while assessing the evidentiary value of dying declarations.

By Whom the Dying Declaration is Recorded:
It is best that it is recorded by the magistrate. If there is no time to call the magistrate, keeping in view the deteriorating condition of the declaration, it can be recorded by anybody. It cannot be said that a dying declaration recorded by a police officer is always invalid. If any dying declaration is not recorded by the competent Magistrate, it is better that signatures of the witnesses are taken who are present at the time of recording it.

Multiple Dying Declarations:
Law in regard to multiple dying declarations has been well settled as per the various decisions delivered by the Supreme Court time and again. In such cases reliability of such statements must be measured very carefully. Hence there can be two cases i.e., where multiple dying declarations which are consistent with each other and secondly case of inconsistent multiple dying declarations.

In the cases of inconsistent dying declarations, the extent of the inconsistencies would then have to be considered by the court. The inconsistencies may turn out to be reconcilable. In such cases, where the inconsistencies go to some matter of detail or description but is incriminatory in nature as far as the accused is concerned, the court would look to the material on record to conclude as to which dying declaration is to be relied on unless it be shown that they are unreliable.

Case Law Analysis:
In the case of Khushal Rao v. State of Bombay, the appellant, Khushal Rao, was charged with the murder of one Radha Bai. The prosecution primarily relied on the dying declaration made by Radha Bai implicating Khushal Rao as her assailant. Radha Bai had sustained severe burn injuries and before succumbing to her injuries, she made a statement to a magistrate accusing Khushal Rao of setting her on fire.

The issues in the case were:

1. Whether the accused could be convicted based on dying declarations alone?
2. Whether a dying declaration can never be the basis of a conviction?

The Supreme Court upheld the admissibility of the dying declaration made by Radha Bai and affirmed the conviction of Khushal Rao based on that declaration. The Court emphasized the importance of dying declarations as a valuable piece of evidence in cases where the declarant is unavailable for cross-examination due to death. The judgment stressed that while dying declarations are not subject to cross-examination, they must be made under circumstances of solemnity and without any possibility of the declarant being influenced by external factors.

Furthermore, the Court outlined the requirements for the admissibility of dying declarations, stating that for a dying declaration to be admissible, it must be proved that the deceased was in a fit state of mind to make the declaration and had ample opportunity to observe and identify the assailant. Additionally, the Court highlighted that the declarant must have a settled and definite purpose of impending death while making the statement.

In Khushal Rao v. State of Bombay (1958), the Supreme Court laid down the following principles related to dying declaration:

• There is no absolute rule of law that a dying declaration cannot be the sole basis of conviction unless corroborated. A true & voluntary declaration needs no corroboration.
• A dying declaration is not a weaker kind of evidence than any other piece of evidence.
• Each case must be determined on its own facts keeping in view the circumstances in which the dying declaration was made.
• A dying declaration stands on the same footing as other pieces of evidence & has to be judged in the light of surrounding circumstances & with reference to the principle governing the weight of evidence.
• 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, &, 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 & human character.

Several other landmark cases in Indian jurisprudence have shaped the interpretation and application of dying declarations under the Indian Evidence Act. One such case is Ratan Gond v. State of Bihar (AIR 1959 SC 18), where the Supreme Court emphasized the importance of ensuring the voluntariness and reliability of dying declarations.
Comparative Analysis with International Jurisdictions:
A comparative analysis with international jurisdictions can provide valuable insights into the treatment of dying declarations in different legal systems. In the United States, for instance, dying declarations are recognized as an exception to the hearsay rule under the Federal Rules of Evidence, provided that the declarant had personal knowledge of the matter asserted and believed that death was imminent.

Similarly, in England and Wales, dying declarations are admissible as evidence under the common law, subject to the requirement that the declarant had a fixed and settled intention of impending death. By juxtaposing the approaches of different jurisdictions, one can gain a deeper understanding of the principles underlying the admissibility and reliability of dying declarations.

Conclusion:
In conclusion, the evidentiary value of dying declarations under the Indian Evidence Act is a subject of considerable importance and complexity. Rooted in the principle of 'nemo moriturus praesumitur mentire', dying declarations occupy a unique position in legal proceedings, providing insights into the circumstances surrounding a person's death.

While their admissibility is explicitly recognized under Sections 32 and 60 of the Indian Evidence Act, their reliability is subject to scrutiny, considering factors such as mental capacity, voluntariness, and consciousness of impending death. Despite their significance, dying declarations have inherent limitations, and courts must exercise caution while relying on them, ensuring corroboration wherever possible.

Through a nuanced understanding of the legal framework and jurisprudence surrounding dying declarations, the Indian judicial system endeavours to uphold principles of fairness and justice in adjudicating cases where such declarations are tendered as evidence.