What is Dying Declaration?

What are the essential ingredients of Dying Declaration?

The provision of the Dying Declaration is referred in sub-section (1) of section 32 of the

Evidence Act, 1872 (Act No. 1 of 1872) Under the Federal Rules of Evidence, a dying

declaration is defined as a statement made by a declarant, who is now unavailable, who

made the statement under a belief of certain death, and the statement concerns the causes

or circumstances of impending death.

In the law of evidence, the dying declaration is an evidence that would normally be

barred as hearsay, but may in common law nonetheless be admitted as evidence in

Criminal law trials, because it constituted the last words of a dying person.

Following are the essential ingredients to be satisfied of dying declaration:

1. Death must be imminent: The statement is made by a person who is conscious and believes that his/her death is

imminent.

2. Cause or Circumstances of death: The statement must pertain to what the person believes to be the cause or

circumstances of death.

3. Statement must be recorded: What is recorded must be the statement made by the person concerned, since it is an

exception to the rule of hearsay evidence. Statement may be recorded either writing or

orally.

4. Statement must be truthful and credible: The statement made by the person must be confidence bearing, truthful and credible.

5. Statement not by tutoring or instigation: The statement should not be one made on tutoring or instigation. If any statement made

by other through tutoring or instigation the evidentiary value of dying declaration shall

not be established.

6. Scan the statement by Court: The court may also scan the statement to see whether the statement is prompted by any

motive of vengeance.

Section 45: Opinions of experts

When the Court has to form an opinion upon a point of foreign law, or of science, or art,

or as to identity of hand writing or finger impressions, the opinions upon that point of

persons especially skilled in such foreign law, science or art, or in questions as to identity

of handwriting or finger impressions are relevant facts.

Such persons are called experts.

Illustration:

The question is, whether the death of A was caused by poison.

The opinion of experts as to the symptoms produced by the poison by which A is

supposed to have died, are relevant.

Who can be called as an Expert?

The Law of Evidence allows an opinion of any person other than the judge as to the

existence to the facts in issue or facts that are relevant to matter. Because the judge is not

expected to be an expert in all fields, especially where the subject matter involves

technical or specialized knowledge.

The provisions for “opinions of experts” is referred in section 45 to 51 of the

Evidence Act, 1872 (Act No. 1 of 1872) and the definition of an expert has been referred

from the provision of section 45 of the said Act.

Under the provision of section 45 of the Evidence Act, 1872 (Act No. 1 of 1872),

followings shall be considered as an expert:

(i) Person having especial and high level knowledge of particular subject matter;

(ii) Person having especially skilled in Foreign Laws;

(iii) Person having knowledge of Science;

(iv) Person having knowledge of Art;

(v) Person having skilled to identify of hand writing and finger print impressions.

And such knowledge has been gathered by him-

(i) By practice;

(ii) Observation; and

(iii) Proper studies