The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 lays down the rules for admitting and evaluating evidence in judicial proceedings. One important exception to the rule of direct oral evidence appears under Section 32, which allows certain statements made by persons who cannot be called as witnesses to be treated as relevant and admissible. This provision is essential because, in many cases, the person who made the statement may have died, disappeared, or is otherwise incapable of testifying. The law ensures that justice is not defeated merely because the maker of the statement is unavailable.
Legal Basis: Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act
Section 32 deals with the circumstances under which statements made by persons who cannot appear before the court become admissible. It primarily covers situations where the person is dead, cannot be found, is incapable of giving evidence, or whose attendance cannot be secured without unreasonable delay or expense. This section is an exception to the hearsay rule because the statements are admitted based on necessity and the assumption of reliability.
The most well-known part of this section is Section 32(1), which includes dying declarations. A dying declaration is considered trustworthy because a person on the verge of death is expected to speak the truth. Other parts of Section 32 include statements made during the ordinary course of business, statements regarding public rights or customs, statements relating to family affairs, and statements concerning the existence of relationships. These statements, although made outside the courtroom, become legally relevant due to the circumstances in which they were made.
Statements Made in the Ordinary Course of Business
Section 32(2) includes statements relating to the ordinary course of business. This becomes relevant when a person records entries or documents for an organization, company, or personal dealings, and later becomes unavailable to testify. The law presumes that such entries are reliable because they were made routinely and not for litigation purposes.
Examples include ledger entries, financial accounts, reports, or correspondence maintained by an employee who later dies or leaves the country. Courts accept these entries as relevant to prove the facts they contain. This enhances efficiency in judicial decision-making, especially in commercial, financial, and contractual disputes.
Statements Relating to Public Rights and Customs
Section 32(4) allows statements by deceased or unavailable persons regarding the existence of any public right, custom, or matter of general interest. These statements must have been made before the dispute arose, ensuring that they were not motivated by litigation or bias. Such statements are essential in cases involving communal rights, village customs, water usage, religious practices, and boundaries.
This provision ensures continuity in the understanding of customs and public rights since such matters often span generations and may not be documented. Courts rely on such historical statements to reconstruct long-standing practices.
Statements Relating to Relationship and Family Affairs
Family matters such as marriage, legitimacy, adoption, and lineage often require statements from individuals with personal knowledge. Under Section 32(5) and (6), statements about family relationships made by deceased or unavailable persons become relevant, provided the person had special means of knowledge. These statements must be made before any dispute about the relationship had arisen.
For example, a grandmother’s written note identifying the family lineage or confirming an adoption becomes crucial when she is no longer alive. Courts often rely on such statements to resolve succession and inheritance disputes.
Statements About the Cause of Death or Circumstances of the Transaction
Dying declarations under Section 32(1) form the most significant and frequently used category of statements by unavailable persons. Such statements relate to the cause of the declarant’s death or the circumstances leading to the death. Courts admit these statements even if the proceedings are not strictly about the declarant’s death in some cases, as long as the circumstances are connected.
The Supreme Court has held that dying declarations may be accepted solely on their own merit, without corroboration, if found truthful and voluntary. This forms a powerful tool in criminal trials, especially murder cases where the victim is often the only witness.
Statements Expressing Opinions as to Public Rights or Customs
Section 32(7) also includes opinions expressed before the dispute arose by persons who are dead or cannot be found. These opinions must be relevant to public rights, customs, or general matters. They are admitted because they reflect community knowledge rather than personal experience.
Such statements help courts resolve disputes involving long-standing communal practices, especially in rural areas where documentation is limited.
Rationale Behind Admitting Statements from Unavailable Persons
The foundation of Section 32 is based on the principle of necessity and trustworthiness. Courts recognize that excluding such statements would sometimes result in injustice, especially when the only person who truly knew the facts is no longer available. The law balances the need for reliability by ensuring that the statements were made under circumstances minimizing the possibility of fabrication.
Thus, the admissibility of these statements is an exception to the hearsay rule and reflects the practical needs of justice.
Real-Time Example
Consider a case where a person is attacked and is critically injured. Before dying, he tells the police officer, “My neighbor Ravi stabbed me because of a land dispute.” This statement becomes a dying declaration under Section 32(1) and is admissible even though the victim is not present to testify. In another instance, a shop accountant maintains daily sales entries and passes away. His business records are admissible under Section 32(2). Similarly, a deceased village elder’s note describing the community’s traditional water-sharing system becomes relevant under Section 32(4). These examples show how the law accommodates necessary evidence even when the witness is unavailable.
Mnemonic to Remember – “D-B-C-F-O-P”
Use this mnemonic to recall the six major categories under Section 32:
D – Dying declaration (cause of death)
B – Business records (ordinary course of business)
C – Customs and public rights
F – Family relationships
O – Opinions on public customs
P – Public matters of general interest
“D-B-C-F-O-P: Death, Business, Custom, Family, Opinion, Public.”
About lawgnan
Strengthen your Evidence Law preparation with a complete, simplified understanding of Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act on Lawgana.in. Our article explains how statements made by persons who are dead, missing, or incapable of testifying become admissible through necessity and reliability. Learn the law behind dying declarations, business records, public customs, family relations, and opinions on public rights with real-life examples and the mnemonic D-B-C-F-O-P for quick revision. Whether you’re a law student, judiciary aspirant, or legal researcher, Lawgana.in provides clear, exam-oriented notes to help you master this essential exception to hearsay.
