“PAKALA NARAYANA SWAMY V EMPEROR”

FINAL DRAFT SUBMITTED IN THE FULFILMENT OF THE COURSE TITLED – LAW OF

EVIDENCE

SUBMITTED TO:

Dr. P.K.V.S. RAMA RAO

LECTURER OF LAW

SUBMITTED BY:

NAME: RAJ KRISHNA

COURSE: B.A., LL.B (Hons.)

ROLL NO: 1359

SEMESTER: 4th

CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, NYAYA NAGAR,

MITHAPUR, PATNA – 800001

1
 DECLARATION BY THE CANDIDATE

I hereby declare that the work reported in the B.A., LL.B (Hons.) Project Report entitled “Pakala

Narayana Swamy v Emperor” submitted at Chanakya National Law University is an authentic

record of my work carried out under the supervision of Dr. P.K.V.S. Rama Rao. I have not

submitted this work elsewhere for any other degree or diploma. I am fully responsible for the

contents of my Project Report.

SIGNATURE OF CANDIDATE

NAME OF CANDIDATE: RAJ KRISHNA

CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, PATNA.

2
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to thank my faculty Dr. P.K.V.S. Rama Rao whose guidance helped me a lot with

structuring my project.

I owe the present accomplishment of my project to my friends, who helped me immensely with

materials throughout the project and without whom I couldn’t have completed it in the present

way.

I would also like to extend my gratitude to my parents and all those unseen hands that helped me

out at every stage of my project.

THANK YOU,

NAME: Raj Krishna

COURSE: B.A., LL.B. (Hons.)

ROLL NO: 1359

SEMESTER – 4th

3
INDEX

INTRODUCTION …………………………………………………………………pg. 5

* AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

* HYPOTHESIS

* RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

* SOURCES OF DATA

* LIMITATON

1. DYING DECLARATION: CONCEPTUAL DISCUSSION………....……….pg.7

2. PAKALA NARAYANA SWAMI V EMPEROR: CASE ANALYSIS……….pg12

3. OTHER CASES ON DYING DECLARATION……………………………..pg.14

4. ENGLISH AND INDIAN LAW COMPARISON……………………….……pg16

5. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS……………………………………….pg 17

BIBLIOGRAPHY………………………………………………………………………pg18

4
INTRODUCTION:

A Dying Declaration means the statement of a person who has died explaining the circumstances
of his death. It can be said to be a statement made by a mortally injured person, indicating who
has injured them and/or the circumstances surrounding their injury. The injured is aware that
he/she is about to die and while the declaration is hearsay, it is admissible since it is believed that
the dying person does not have any reason to lie

Pakala Narayana Swamy v Emperor is one such landmark case on dying declaration.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES:

1. The researcher tends to find the rationale of dying declaration.

2. The researcher tends to analyze the judgment of the court in matter of dying declaration.

3. The researcher tends to give certain suggestions after analyzing the case and existing laws.

HYPOTHESIS:

The researcher tends to presume that Section 32(1) needs an amendment.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:

The researcher has relied upon Doctrinal method of research to complete the project.

SOURCES OF DATA:

The researcher has relied on both primary and secondary sources to complete the project.

1. Primary Sources: Acts.

2. Secondary Sources: Books, newspapers and websites.

5
LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY:

The researcher had territorial, monetary and time limitations in completing the project.

6
1. DYING DECLARATION: CONCEPTUAL DISCUSSION

A Dying Declaration means the statement of a person who has died explaining the circumstances
of his death. It can be said to be a statement made by a mortally injured person, indicating who
has injured them and/or the circumstances surrounding their injury. The injured is aware that
he/she is about to die and while the declaration is hearsay, it is admissible since it is believed that
the dying person does not have any reason to lie.1

Such a statement can be proved when it 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. The statement will be
relevant in every case or proceeding in which the cause of that person’s death comes into
question.2

Clause (1) of section 32 of the Evidence Act provides for the ‘dying declaration’ which is
incorporated from the English Law principle. Section 32(1) reads as under:

Cases in which statement of relevant fact by person who is dead or cannot be found, etc., is
relevant: - 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.

1
Harpreet Kaur, Dying Declaration, Law School Notes (April 29, 2017, 6:00 a.m.),
https://lawschoolnotes.wordpress.com/2016/07/04/dying-declaration-evidentiary-value/
2
Id.

7
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.3

Illustration:

(a) The question is, whether A was murdered by B; or

A dies of injuries received in a transaction in the course of which she was ravished. The question
is, whether she was ravished by B; or

The question is, whether A was killed by B under such circumstances that a suit would lie
against B by A’s widow.

Statements made by A as to the cause of his or her death, referring respectively to the murder,
the rape, and the actionable wrong under consideration, are relevant facts.

If as a result thereof, the Court is satisfied that the statement made by a person who is now dead
is relevant, the same becomes admissible in terms of Sub-section, (1) of Section 32 of the
Evidence Act.

As to be cause of his death

3
Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Sec. 32(1).

8
ESSENTIAL CONDITIONS FOR ADMISSIBILITY OF DYING DECLARATION:

1. To whom the statement is to be made and its form:- A statement of dying declaration could
be made to any person – a doctor, a Magistrate, a friend or near relative, a police officer.
However, a statement recorded by a Magistrate or doctor is considered more reliable, and that
recorded by a police officer or close relative not (require more scrutiny).

No particular form of recording a statement is prescribed. The statement could be written, oral or
even verbal (e.g., gestures). In Queen Empress v. Abdullah; where the throat of the deceased girl
was cut and she being unable to speak indicated the name of the accused by the signs of her
hand, this was held to be relevant as dying declaration.4

2. The person making the statement must have died:- The death need not occur immediately
after the making of the statement. However, the death must occur. If the persons making the
declaration chances to live, his statement is inadmissible as a dying declaration, but it might be
relied under section 157 to corroborate his testimony when examined. Such a statement can also
be used to contradict him under section 145. Further, it can be used to corroborate the evidence
in Court under sections 6 and 8. The fact that the person is dead must be proved by the person
proposing to give evidence of his statement.5

The Supreme Court in Ramprasad v. State of Maharashtra observed that at the time when
declarant gave the statement he would have been under expectation of death but that is not
sufficient to wiggle it into the cassette of section 32 of Evidence Act, 1872. As long as the maker
of the statement is alive it would remain only in the realm of a statement recorded during

4
Kaur, supra note 1.
5
Id.

9
investigation. It was held, that if a person making a dying declaration survives his statement
cannot be used as evidence under section 32 of the Act.6

Statement must relate to the cause of his death or the circumstances of the transaction
which resulted in his death:- If the statement made by the deceased does not relate to his death,
but to the death of another, it is not relevant. For example, where the wife made a statement that
her husband is killed by Z and then she committed the suicide.

The circumstances of transaction resulting in death must bear proximate relation to the cause of
death or actual occurrence. The general expressions indicating fear or suspicion, whether of a
particular individual or otherwise and not directly related to the occasion of death will not be
admissible. But, statements made by the deceased that he was proceeding to the spot where he
was in fact killed, or as to his reasons for so proceeding, or that he was going to meet a particular
person, would to each of them be circumstances of the transaction.7

The cause of death must be in question:- The declaration under section 32(1) must relate to the
death of the declarant. In Dannu Singh v. Emperor, A and five other persons were charged with
having committed a dacoity in a village. A, who was seriously wounded while being arrested,
made before his death a dying declaration as to how the dacoity was committed and who had
taken part in it. It was held that declaration was not admissible in evidence against other persons,
as it does not relate to his death, but relates to participation of his associates in the dacoity.8

The statement must be complete and consistent:- If the deceased fails to complete the main
sentence (as for instance, the genesis or the motive for the crime), a dying declaration would be

6
Id.
7
Id.
8
Id.

10
unreliable. However, if the deceased has narrated the full story, but fails to answer the last
question as to what more he wanted to say, the declaration can be relied upon.

A dying declaration ought not to be rejected because it does not contain details or suffers from
minor inconsistencies. Merely because it is a brief statement, it is not to be discharged.
Shortness, in fact, guaranteed truth.

Declarant must be competent as a witness:- It is necessary for the relevancy of a dying

declaration that the declarant, if he had lived on, would have been competent witness. Thus, in a
prosecution for the murder of a child, aged four years, it was proposed to put in evidence, as a
dying declaration, what the child said shortly before her death. The declaration was held to be
inadmissible.9

9
Id.

11
2. PAKALA NARAYAN SWAMI V THE EMPEROR

The facts of the case were that the accused had borrowed Rs. 3000 from the deceased during
1936. On 20th March, 1937, the deceased received a letter from the accused inviting him to
come that day or next to Behrampur. The deceased left his house on 21st March, 1937 in time to
catch the train for Behrampur. But he did not come back. On 23rd March, 1937, at about noon,
his dead body was found in a steel trunk in a third class compartment at Puri. The dead body was
identified by the widow. The accused was tried and convicted for murder and sentenced to death.
During the trial, the widow of the deceased stated before the Court that on that day her husband
showed her a letter and said that he was going to Behrampur as the appellant’s wife had written
to him and told him to go and receive payment for his dues. This statement was objected by the
appellant because it was not a statement after the transaction or the injury. Their Lordships of the
Privy Coucil held them to be admissible because it related to the circumstances of the transaction
which resulted in his death and so, it was rightly admitted under section 32(1).10 In this
connection, the observations made by the Lord Atkin are worth noting:

“The phrase ‘circumstance of transaction’, no doubt, conveys some limitations. It is not as broad
as the analogous use n ‘circumstantial evidence’ which includes the evidence of all facts. It is on
the other hand narrower. Circumstances must have some proximate relation to the actual
occurrence though as for instance in a case of prolonged poisoning, they may be related to dates
at a considerable distance from the date of actual dose.”11

Further His Lordship said-

“The circumstances must be the circumstances of the transaction in general indicating fear or
suspicion whether of a particular individual or otherwise and not directly related to the occasion

10
Pakala Narayan Swami V Emperor, AIR 1939 PC 47.
11
Id.

12
of the death will not be admissible. But statements made by the deceased that he was proceeding
to the spot where he was in fact killed or as to the reasons for so proceeding or that he was
going to meet a particular person or that he had been invited by such person to meet him, would
each of them, be the circumstances of the transaction. The statement under this clause may be
made before the cause of death has arisen or before the deceased has reason to anticipate being
killed.”12

12
Id.

13
3. OTHER FAMOUS CASES OF DYING DECLARATION

1. RATAN GOND V STATE OF BIHAR

In this case13, the accused was charged with the murder. One of the pieces of evidence against
him was the statement of deceased’s sister, who also died subsequently. As a result of her
statement, the victim’s dead body was recovered. The question was whether her statement was
relevant? The Supreme Court held that it was not admissible under section 32(1) as it did not
relate to the cause of her own death but to that of her sister.

Similarly, the declarant’s death must be proved beyond doubt to have been caused by the injuries
received by him in the incident in question. In case it is proved that he died of some other cause,
it would not be admissible under clause (1) of section 32. For example, the prisoner was
convicted on the basis of dying declaration of a person who received two shot wounds during the
occurrence. Although his dying declaration was recorded, but he died 20 days after he had left
the hospital. There was no evidence to show that he died of the injuries received by him at the
said incident. On the question of admissibility of the dying declaration, the Supreme Court held
that when the dead person in the present case was not proved to have died as a result of injuries
received in the incident, his statement cannot be said to be a statement as to the cause of his
death or as to any of the circumstances of the transaction which resulted in his death. So, they
held his statement to be inadmissible under section 32.14

2. GANGARAM CASE:

In this case the lady gave a dying declaration when she was injured. However, after 2 days she
made another statement which was contradictory to the previous statement. In this condition the
question was which DD should be accepted.

13
Ratan Gond v. State of Bihar, (1959) SCR 1336.
14
Id.

14
It was decided that first one should be accepted. In the second one it would have been the
situation that the name of an innocent was included and accused’s name was excluded. Further
the rationale is that the truth lies upon the tongue of the dying person. Hence, the first one was
accepted.

15
4. DYING DECLARATION UNDER INDIAN AND ENGLISH LAW

Under English Law, a dying declaration is admissible only on a criminal charge of homicide or
manslaughter, whereas in India it is admissible in all proceedings, civil or criminal.

Under the English Law, credence and the relevancy of a dying Declaration is only where a
person making such a statement is in a hopeless condition and is expecting imminent death. So
under the English Law, for its admissibility, the declarant should have been in actual danger of
death at the time when they are made, and that he should have had a full apprehension of this
danger and the death should have ensued. The admissibility rests on the principle that a sense of
impending death produces in a man’s mind the same feeling as that of a conscientious and a
virtuous man under oath. If evidence in a case reveals that the declarant has reached this state
while making a declaration then within the sphere of Indian Law, while testing the credibility of
such dying declaration, weightage can be given, of course, depending on the other relevant facts
and circumstances of the case. However, under the Indian Law, the dying declaration is relevant
whether the person who makes it was or was not under expectation of death at the time of
declaration.

Under the English Law, the declaration must have been competent as a witness, thus, imbecility
of tender age will exclude the declaration. It is, however, doubtful whether this rule is applicable
in India. The credit of such a declarant may be impeached in the same way as that of witness
actually examined in a court.

16
5. CONCLUSION

Dying declarations are statements oral or documentary made by the person as to the cause of his
death or as to the circumstances of the transactions resulting in his death. The grounds of
admission of a dying declaration are:

Firstly, necessity, for the victim being generally the only principal eye-witness to the crime, the
exclusion of his statement might defeat the ends of justice; and Secondly, the Pakala Narayana
Swami v. The Emperorwhich creates a sanction equal to the obligation of an oath.

The general principle on which this species of evidence is admitted is that they are declarations
made in extremity, when the party is at the point of death and when every hope of this world has
gone, when every motive to falsehood is silence and the mind is induced by the most powerful
consideration to speak the truth; a situation so solemn and so lawful is considered by law as
creating an obligation equal to that which is imposed by a positive oath administered in a Court
of Justice

A statement, written or oral, made by a person who is dead as to the cause of his death or as to
any of the circumstances of the transaction which resulted in his death, in case in which the cause
of that person’s death comes into question, becomes admissible under section 32 of the Evidence
Act. Such statement made by the deceased is commonly termed as dying declaration. There is no
requirement of law that such a statement must necessarily be made to a Magistrate. What
evidentiary value or weight has to be attached to such statement must necessarily depend on the
facts and circumstances of each particular case. In a proper case, it may be permissible to convict
a person only on the basis of a dying declaration in the light of the facts and circumstances of the
case.

17
BIBLIOGRAPHY

BOOKS

1. Batuk Lal, The Law of Evidence, Allahabad: Central Law Agency, 2010, 19th

2. J. M. Monir, Textbook on the Law of Evidence, New Delhi: Universal Law Publishing Co.,
2010, 8th edition.

3. Avtar Singh, Principles of The Law of Evidence, Allahabad: Central Law Publications, 2011,
19th edition.

4. Rameshwar Dayal, Commentaries on Indian Evidence Act, Allahabad: Allahabad Law

Agency, 1964.

5. K. Sinha Ray, The Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Vol. I, Allahabad: Premier Publishing Co.,
2006.

6. L. Venkatarama Aiyar (Ed.), Field’s Law of Evidence (In India and Pakistan), Vol. III,
Allahabad: R.S. Law Publishers,1966, 9th edition.

WEBSITES

1. http://www.lawyersclubindia.com/articles/DYING-DECLARATION-
2639.asp#.UI9x6Gd_bzQ

2. http://www.preservearticles.com/2012032929257/short-notes-on-the-value-of-dying-
declaration-in-india.html

3. http://legalservicesindia.com/article/article/dying-declaration-1137-1.html

4. http://www.manupatrafast.in/pers/Personalized.aspx

5. http://www.findlaw.com.au/articles/4432/the-dying-declaration-can-it-be-admissible-as-
evid.aspx

18