Question: L a woman is raped by B. As a result of shock, she (L) committed suicide three days after the occurrence, by drowning herself. Is the statement made by L regarding her rape to her mother-in-law immediately after the rape, admissible as a dying declaration under Section 32(1) of the Evidence Act? Find the answer to the… Read More »

Question: L a woman is raped by B. As a result of shock, she (L) committed suicide three days after the occurrence, by drowning herself. Is the statement made by L regarding her rape to her mother-in-law immediately after the rape, admissible as a dying declaration under Section 32(1) of the Evidence Act? Find the answer to the mains question only on Legal Bites. [L a woman is raped by B. As a result of shock, she (L) committed suicide three days after the occurrence, by drowning herself....

Question: L a woman is raped by B. As a result of shock, she (L) committed suicide three days after the occurrence, by drowning herself. Is the statement made by L regarding her rape to her mother-in-law immediately after the rape, admissible as a dying declaration under Section 32(1) of the Evidence Act?

Find the answer to the mains question only on Legal Bites. [L a woman is raped by B. As a result of shock, she (L) committed suicide three days after the occurrence, by drowning herself. Is the statement made by L regarding her rape to her mother-in-law immediately after the rape, admissible as a dying declaration under Section 32(1) of the Evidence Act?]

Answer

The word “death” appearing in section 32 is inclusive of suicidal or homicidal death. The section is not confined to any particular kind of death, e.g. homicide. It includes suicidal death also. The circumstances which may be relevant to prove a case of suicide would be equally relevant under the section as held in the case of Sharad Birdichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1984 SC 1622.

In the case of Amar Singh v. State Of Rajasthan (2010), the deceased’s mother and brother gave the evidence, that the deceased made the statement month prior to the incident of suicide by her that the appellant, her husband used to taunt the deceased saying that she had come from a hunger house and the appellant himself go to the house of deceased and asked for 10.000/-.

It was held that the dying declaration and appellant were convicted under sections 304B and 498A of IPC. The Court referred to Pakala Narain Swamy v. Emperor [(1939) 41 BOMLR 428]. in which Lord Atkin: held that the circumstances of the transaction which resulted in the death of the declarant will be admissible if such transaction has some proximate effect.

Further, in the case of Deepak v. State of MP, 1994 Cr LJ 767 (MP), where the deceased stated in her dying declarations that the accused molested her and she immolated herself after such incident, it was held that the dying declaration was a relevant fact and was admissible in evidence and to hold it otherwise would be a negation of justice and a clear misrepresentation of the provisions of section 32(1).

Therefore, in the present case at hand, the statement made by L to her mother-in-law before she committed suicide that she was raped by B and afterwards committed suicide as a result of shock, such statement of the L shall be held as dying declaration under section 32(1) of Indian Evidence Act.


Important Mains Questions Series for Judiciary, APO & University Exams

  1. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-I
  2. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-II
  3. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-III
  4. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-IV
  5. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-V
  6. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-VI
  7. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-VII
  8. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-VIII
  9. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-IX
  10. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-X
Updated On 2021-10-07T12:52:03+05:30
Admin LB

Admin LB

Next Story