- SECTION – 32 and 162 (Dying Declaration)
- Bench: Justice Atkin, Justice G Rankin, Justice Wright and Justice Thankerton
Facts:
The current appeal has been made against the conviction of the appellant of the victim for which the appellant was sentenced to death by the High Court of Patna. The wife of the accused had taken money from the deceased in 1936. In 1937 when the deceased received letter inviting him to Berhampur for collection of dues, where the letter was unsigned the suspicions was that the wife sent the letter. The judge was however not satisfied with this evidence. The body of the deceased was found cut in 7 pieces in an unclaimed truck in Puri. It was found that the truck was bought on behalf of the accused, based on the evidence of the washer man who made the purchase. Based on these facts the accused was arrested and found guilty.
Issues:
The two main issues that were raised in this case included –
- Whether the statement of the deceased’s wife stating that the deceased had told her he is going to collect dues from the wife of the accused can be treated as dying declaration?
- Whether the statements given by the wife of the accused during the investigation will be protected under section 162 of CrPC or not?
Contentions of the Appellant:
The appellant contended that the statement of the wife of the deceased cannot be admissible in this case as evidence since it cannot be construed as being evidence in the first place under Section 32 of the Act as it is neither related to the death or the causation of the same. Further, Statements made by accused before arrest to the police cannot be admitted under section 162 of CrPC because the term ‘any person’ used in section 162 includes the accused. Therefore, the Statements made by appellant-accused to police during custody cannot be confession as per Section 25 of Evidence Act and is not admissible. Hence there is no evidence proving the accused as being the convict.
Contentions of the Respondent:
In relation to the dying declaration it was contended that the circumstances had proximate relation to the causation of death and can therefore be considered as admissible evidence of dying declaration. The statement was made by the deceased to the accused in relation to the event that led to his death and is therefore, admissible. Further, the staments of the accused made to the police were contended to be included as they were made by him personally and should be protected under Section 162 of the code.
Judgment:
Stating that, “a confession must either admit in terms the offence or at any rate substantially all the facts which constitute the offence. An admission of a gravely incriminating fact, even a conclusively incriminating fact is not in itself a confession.” The court held that the statement of the wife of the deceased was accepted by the Court and were made admissible by the Court in the same manner. The statement made by a person during the investigation will not be admissible as evidence in court even if the statements are made by the person who is ultimately the accused and such statements are protected under section 162 of CrPC.
