UP Police Regs 120Chapter 11 · Research
Section 120 · Paragraph 115. Recording of dying declaration by the Investigating Officer
Text size — level 1 of 4
The investigating officer in a case where a person is so seriously injured that death is likely before reaching a hospital, where a dying declaration can be recorded, should immediately record the declaration himself in the presence of two respectable witnesses, and obtain the signatures or thumb impressions of the declarant and the witnesses below the declaration.
Note:
The statement given to the investigator is not personally admissible. However, a report based on the statement of the deceased, even if written to a police officer, is considered a deposition, because the author was not the investigating officer at the time of its recording. It is not necessary that such a statement contains the entire incident or antecedents, but it should always be read with caution because the declarant is not available for cross-examination. Where no error is found in such a statement, it can be relied upon even without support. As held in Munnu Ram vs. State, a detailed deposition, even if not provided, given for the first time, which was given under duress and coercion and was found to be true, does not have any adverse effect on its validity.
In Jaswant Singh vs. State, it was held that deposition evidence, where the statement of the deceased was recorded by the investigating officer in the hospital in the presence of the doctor on duty, and there was no need to clear any doubt in it, is admissible. It is sufficient to prove the crime, the woman gave a statement while dying that her husband had burnt her but she should not be killed, this statement does not show that she is protecting the accused and in Biswani Narayan Pawar vs State this statement was relied upon,
When after careful scrutiny the court found the statement Nijai to be true, then in Kusa vs State it was considered to be the most reliable evidence and for which no other support was considered necessary, if authentic facts are found in the statement Nijai then they cannot be ignored.
Note:
The statement given to the investigator is not personally admissible. However, a report based on the statement of the deceased, even if written to a police officer, is considered a deposition, because the author was not the investigating officer at the time of its recording. It is not necessary that such a statement contains the entire incident or antecedents, but it should always be read with caution because the declarant is not available for cross-examination. Where no error is found in such a statement, it can be relied upon even without support. As held in Munnu Ram vs. State, a detailed deposition, even if not provided, given for the first time, which was given under duress and coercion and was found to be true, does not have any adverse effect on its validity.
In Jaswant Singh vs. State, it was held that deposition evidence, where the statement of the deceased was recorded by the investigating officer in the hospital in the presence of the doctor on duty, and there was no need to clear any doubt in it, is admissible. It is sufficient to prove the crime, the woman gave a statement while dying that her husband had burnt her but she should not be killed, this statement does not show that she is protecting the accused and in Biswani Narayan Pawar vs State this statement was relied upon,
When after careful scrutiny the court found the statement Nijai to be true, then in Kusa vs State it was considered to be the most reliable evidence and for which no other support was considered necessary, if authentic facts are found in the statement Nijai then they cannot be ignored.
Your private note on this section
Only you can see this note.