‘X’ states to his wife that he was proceeding to Delhi to meet ‘Y’ and collect the debt due from him and proceeds to the house of ‘Y’ at Delhi, where he was murdered by ‘Y’. Is the statement made by ‘X’ to his wife admissible? Under which Section. Elaborate citing case law.

Facts of the Case

‘X’ owed money to ‘Y’. One day, X informed his wife that he was going to Delhi to meet ‘Y’ and collect the debt due from him. After making this statement, X proceeded to Delhi and went to the house of ‘Y’. Subsequently, X was murdered by ‘Y’ at Delhi.

During the trial of ‘Y’ for the murder of ‘X’, the prosecution seeks to rely on the statement made by ‘X’ to his wife regarding his intention to go to Delhi to meet ‘Y’ for recovering the debt.

The question arises whether this statement is admissible in evidence, and if so, under which provision of the Indian Evidence Act.

Issues in the Case

1. Whether the statement made by ‘X’ to his wife is admissible after his death?
2. Whether the statement relates to the cause of death or the circumstances of the transaction resulting in death?
3. Whether such a statement falls within the scope of Section 32(1) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872?
4. What is the evidentiary value of such a statement?

Legal Principles Covered to Support Case Proceeding and Judgements

A. Relevant Provision – Section 32(1), Indian Evidence Act, 1872

Section 32(1) provides that statements made by a person who is dead are relevant if:

The statement relates to the cause of his death, or
The statement relates to any of the circumstances of the transaction which resulted in his death,
In cases in which the cause of that person’s death comes into question.

This provision is an exception to the hearsay rule.

B. Meaning of “Circumstances of the Transaction”

The phrase “circumstances of the transaction” has been interpreted broadly by courts. It includes:

• Statements preceding the occurrence,
• Statements that explain the motive, intention, or conduct of the deceased,
• Statements that have a proximate link with the death, even though made before the actual death.

Thus, a statement indicating where the deceased was going, why he was going, and whom he intended to meet, if closely connected with the murder, is admissible.

C. Applicability to the Present Case

• ‘X’ stated that he was going to Delhi to meet ‘Y’ to recover a debt.
• This statement explains:
  • The reason for X’s journey,
  • The identity of the person he went to meet, and
  • The immediate chain of events leading to his death.
• The statement has a direct and proximate nexus with the murder of ‘X’.

Hence, the statement forms part of the circumstances of the transaction which resulted in his death.

D. Important Case Laws

1. Pakalanarayana Swami v. Emperor (1939 PC)
   • The deceased stated: “I am going to Berhampur to collect money from my uncle.”
   • The deceased was later murdered.
   • Held: The statement was admissible under Section 32(1) as it explained the circumstances leading to death.
   • This case is directly applicable to the present problem.
2. Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra (1984)
   • The Supreme Court held that statements which have a proximate relation with death are admissible under Section 32(1).
3. Rattan Singh v. State of Himachal Pradesh (1997)
   • The Court observed that statements indicating the intention and movement of the deceased immediately before death are relevant under Section 32(1).

E. Nature and Evidentiary Value

• Such a statement is substantive evidence, not merely corroborative.
• However, it must be:
  • Voluntary,
  • Truthful, and
  • Closely connected with the transaction resulting in death.

Possible Judgement

The Court is likely to hold that:

1. The statement made by ‘X’ to his wife is admissible in evidence.
2. It is admissible under Section 32(1) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, as it relates to the circumstances of the transaction resulting in his death.
3. The statement helps establish:
   • The last known intention of the deceased,
   • The link between the accused ‘Y’ and the deceased, and
   • The chain of events leading to the murder.
4. The Court may rely upon the statement along with other corroborative evidence to determine the guilt of ‘Y’.

About lawgnan

If you want clear, reliable, and legally accurate explanations of complex Evidence Act principles, visit Lawgana.in—India’s trusted legal knowledge platform. Whether you are a law student, advocate, researcher, or someone facing a legal challenge, Lawgana provides simplified case laws, solved legal problems, easy explanations of statutory provisions, and exam-ready notes. Stay updated with daily legal content, case summaries, and practical insights that strengthen your understanding of Indian law. Explore more legal topics, download resources, and build your knowledge foundation with Lawgana.in today.