Supreme Court lays down the factors to be considered while relying on Dying Declaration

The Supreme Court recently laid down guidelines for testing the veracity of dying declaration while acquitting a death row convict in (Irfan @ Naka v. State of Uttar Pradesh). It was reiterated by the court that even though the law attaches a presumption of truthfulness to such statements, ‘great caution’ must be exercised while relying on dying declarations. It held that the benefit of doubt must always go in favour of the accused and that the prosecution has the burden of proof to establish the charge beyond any reasonable doubt. It was further held that it is not enough for the court to say that the dying declaration is reliable as the accused is named in the dying declaration as the assailant. The court must look into the other surrounding circumstances also while relying on the dying declaration.

Background

The accused, Irfan was sentenced to death by sessions court for setting his two brothers and his son on fire while they were sleeping after locking them inside a room. The victims were rescued after their shrieks were heard and admitted to hospital where the dying declaration of two of the victims was also recorded. Irfan’s conviction and death penalty was later upheld by the Allahabad High Court relying on the dying declarations of the two victims.

The execution of sentence was later stayed by the Supreme Court in May 2022.

Guidelines laid down by the court

The court held that it is unsafe to record the conviction on the basis of dying declaration alone without referring to other surrounding circumstances and corroboration. The court concluded that the two dying declarations and the oral evidence of the two witnesses are contrary to each other and neither of them inspire any confidence. Where there is any suspicion over the veracity of dying declaration, such statements cannot be the sole basis for conviction.

The court further laid down an illustrative list of factors to examine the veracity of dying declaration-

1. Whether the person making the statement was in expectation of death?
2. Whether the dying declaration was made at the earliest opportunity?
3. Whether there is any reasonable suspicion to believe that the statement was put in the mouth of the dying person?
4. Whether the statement was a result of prompting, tutoring or leading at the interest of any party?
5. Whether the statement was recorded properly or not?
6. Whether the person had opportunity to clearly recognise the accused?
7.  Whether the dying declaration has been inconsistent throughout?
8. Whether the dying declaration in itself is a manifestation/fiction of the person’s imagination?
9. Whether the dying declaration was voluntary or not?
10. Whether in case of multiple dying declarations, the first one inspires truth and is consistent with others?
11. Whether the person was in fit state of mind or as per the injuries it would have been impossible for the deceased to make any statement?

Conclusion

Dying declaration is a substantive piece of evidence and can be the sole basis of conviction only if it proves the guilty of the accused beyond any reasonable doubt. Conviction cannot be made on the sole basis that the accused was named in that declaration if it is inconsistent with other surrounding circumstances.