The dying declaration of a person can be an admissible piece of evidence even though he or she may die several days after it is recorded, the Supreme Court has ruled.
Reliance on such evidence cannot be discarded merely on presumption that the long gap between recording of the declaration and the actual death creates a possibility of the deceased being tutored, the apex court said, while upholding the conviction of a woman who burnt her daughter-in-law to death.
Accused Maniben and her elder son Girish Bhai had earlier been convicted by a sessions court in Gujarat for setting ablaze Kokilaben due to some domestic dispute.
Maniben carried out the crime with the help of her elder son Girish, when the deceased’s husband Dinesh Danabhai had gone to office. The deceased died 25 days after her dying declaration was recorded.

Tutored statement
The Gujarat High Court upheld the conviction following which Maniben appealed in the apex court. In her defence before the SC, Maniben took the plea that her daughter-in-law committed suicide and also claimed that the deceased’s dying declaration was tutored as Kokilaben died 25 days after the statement was recorded. The accused claimed the deceased was tutored by her husband to implicate his mother and brother. However, a bench of Justices S B Sinha and Markandeya Katju, which rejected the argument, said that there were no inconsistencies in the statement recorded by the hospital authorities and the dying declaration entered by the magistrate. “A son would not falsely implicate his mother,” the bench observed.