MCQ 1 Dec 2023

Daily Static MCQs for CLAT Prelims Exams - (1 December 2023)



The Supreme Court held that the First Information Report (FIR) is a public document defined under Section 74 of the Evidence Act. The statement by an injured person recorded as FIR can be treated as a dying declaration and such a statement is admissible under Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act, the bench of Justices observed while convicting Prabhunath Singh, a former Member of Parliament. One of the issues raised in this case was whether the FIR or Bayan Tahriri can be said to be proved as a piece of reliable prosecution evidence and if so, what would be the position of law on the issue of treating the FIR or Bayan Tahriri as the Dying Declaration? The court held: In this respect various earlier pronouncements of this Court have clarified the position of law that the statement by an injured person recorded as FIR can be treated as a dying declaration and such a statement is admissible under Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act. It was also held that the dying declaration must not cover the whole incident or narrate the case history. Corroboration is not necessary for this situation; a dying declaration can be the sole basis for conviction. On the issue of whether FIR is a public document, the bench, referred to various High Court judgments and said: This Court endorses the above view and holds that FIR is a public document defined under Section 74 of the Evidence Act.

The court clarified that any public document does not stand proven by the mere fact of its production. The court made the following observations:

1. It is proved in the usual manner of proof when an objection to it is taken. The Court usually accepts a fact as proved when, after considering the document and the evidence before it, concludes that what is stated in the document is believable based on what the document, on the face of it, states along with what a witness to the document states about the contents and how the document was prepared/authored.

2. According to the common practice of Trial Court and also according to the General Rules (Criminal) as applicable in the case, all the papers and documents filed and produced during any inquiry and trial of a criminal case are marked as ‘Paper No.’ and at the stage of evidence, when any article, weapon, material, 105 or document is admitted as evidence, it is marked as an exhibit, be it in any manner whatsoever either by use of alphabets or by use of numbers (generally as Ex-Kha for prosecution evidence and Ex-Kha as defence evidence).

3. At the stage of evidence, when any document/paper is formally produced for being treated as a piece of evidence, the Court looks at two basic aspects. Firstly, the existence of the document on the Court’s record and, secondly, the proof of its execution or its contents being sufficiently deposed to by a witness having requisite knowledge thereof, where after, the document in question is marked as exhibit. At the stage of exhibiting any document as a piece of evidence, the truth of what is stated in the document is not considered. It is left open to final evaluation at the trial after cross-examination, and the entire testimony of the witness about the existence and contents of the document is weighed in conjunction with various other factors emerging during a trial. At the final evaluation stage, the Trial Court concludes whether the document speaks the truth and decides what weight to give it for final decision. In other words, its evidentiary value is analysed by the Courts at the time of final judgment.

Question1:- Arnab was riding a motorcycle when he met with an accident by a truck and in the consequence he badly got injured. As per the statement made by Arnab (as a FIR) to the police officer in the hospital, truck driver was heavily drunk. After giving the statement to police Arnab died. Decide the validity of Arnab’s statement.
  • A. It will be considered as dying declaration
  • B. It will not be considered as dying declaration
  • C. Statement made by Arnab is merely a complaint, hence it has no value in the eyes of law
  • D. Can’t be determined
Answer is A is correct. In the case of Munnu Raja and another v. State of M.P the Supreme Court of India observed that statement made by injured person recorded as FIR can be deemed as dying declaration and such declaration is admissible under Section 32 of Indian Evidence Act. It was also observed by the court that dying declaration must not shows the whole incident or narrate the case history. Corroboration is not necessary in this situation, Dying declaration can be declared as the exclusive evidence for the purpose of conviction. Hence, A is the correct option.
Question2:-Suppose in the above case facts, Arnab remains in hospital for 8 days but did not dies and his statement has been recorded as the dying declaration because doctor informed everyone that he will lose his life after the accident, what is the evidentiary value of statement made Arnab in such scenario?
  • A. Statement made by Arnab will be considered as dying declaration
  • B. Statement made by Arnab will not be considered as dying declaration
  • C. It is not a case which needs to file FIR
  • D. None of the above
Answer is B is correct. In the case of State of Punjab v. Kikar Singh, it was held that an FIR could not be treated as a dying declaration when the victim remained in the hospital for a considerable time (8 days). When the dying declaration given by the deceased is recorded, the question arises that after the dying declaration was recorded and the deceased is still alive, was the statement holds the same effect?. In that situation, the deceased now turned to be a witness against the accused to narrate what the actual story was. As the dying declaration itself mentioned the word dying, so it is necessary that there must be an expectation of death on the part of the declarant. Hence, B is the correct option.
Question3:-A was charged with the offence of murder of D by cutting her throat with a razor blade. Subsequent to the incident, D was taken to the police station and then the dispensary by her mother, where she was alive till the morning. When D was taken to the police station, she was questioned by her mother in the presence of a sub-inspector, deputy magistrate, and subsequently by the assistant surgeon. She was unable to speak but conscious and able to make gestures and signs. Magistrate asked D, as to who had wounded her and by what means, but due to the injured condition, D was unable to speak. After that, the magistrate mentioned several names one by one and asked if they had wounded her. D moved her hand forward and backwards and made negative and affirmative signs. Subsequently, the magistrate asked whether A had wounded her and subsequently mentioned the razor blade, for which D waved her hand and made the sign in the affirmative, the magistrate recorded the statement. Determine what constitutes the dying declaration.
  • A. The statement made by A denying any involvement in the murder of D.
  • B. The gestures made by D to the magistrate affirming the involvement of A.
  • C. The signs and gestures made by D to her doctor while she was in excruciating pain.
  • D. None of the above.
Answer is B is correct. The facts of the aforestated case are analogous to the case of Queen-Empress v. Abdullah, wherein the signs and gestures of Dulari prior to her death made to the Magistrate and recorded as the dying declaration of Dulari, were accepted as evidence to prosecute Abdullah. Therefore, Option B is the correct answer.
Question4:-A, a surgeon, delivered a baby to S on a particular date and regularly maintained a diary of the relevant surgeries performed by him during the day. Later on, A dies. Determine the relevant fact as to the birth date of the child of S, based on the principle stated in the passage.
  • A. Deceased A’s diary entry of the delivery of S’s baby.
  • B. A’s record of surgeries performed prior to the birth of S’s child.
  • C. S is the mother so she has a choice to decide the date of birth.
  • D. None of the above.
Answer is A is correct. The diary maintained regularly by the deceased Dr. A contains the record of the surgery of S and the birth date of S’s child, which shall be deemed as relevant fact as this entry of the surgery on S and the subsequent birth of the child shall be treated as a dying declaration by the deceased doctor. The other records of the surgeries performed by A prior to S’s surgery are irrelevant as they do not pertain to the birth of S’s child. Furthermore, the mother cannot choose a date of birth as it is a legal record. Therefore, Option A is the correct answer.
Question5:-Identify the incorrect statement pertaining to the provision of dying declaration in law.
  • A. The dying declaration is made by the near friend or legal representative of the deceased.
  • B. The dying declaration made can be in oral, written or by conduct of the deceased party.
  • C. The statements made as a dying declaration are treated as evidence and are admissible in the court of law.
  • D. The person who is conscious of Compos Mentis and knows that death is about to happen can make a dying declaration.
Answer is A is correct. Section 32 (1) of the Indian Evidence Act defines when the statement is made by the person as the cause of his death, or as any of the circumstances of the transaction which resulted in his loss of life, in cases in which the cause of that person’s death comes into question. Furthermore, the statement shall be made by the deceased person himself and not his near friend or legal representative. Therefore, Option A is the correct answer.