What do you understand by dying declaration? Under what circumstances is a declaration admissible under the Evidence Act?

A ‘Dying declaration’ means the statement of a person who has died explaining the circumstances of his death.

Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 lays down important provisions. This section considers the evidence of the following persons to be relevant 
(a) Who is dead 
(b) Who cannot be found 
(c) Who are incompetent to give evidence; or 
(d) Whose attendance cannot be procured without an amount of delay or expense which under the circumstances of the case appears to the court unreasonable

According to English law, the statement is relevant only when the charge is that of the murder of manslaughter. 

In English Law, the dying declaration requires the following - 
(a) Person Making statement is on death bed; 
(b) He has a reasonable apprehension that he is about to die or 
(c) He is completely disappointed from the wish to live; 
(d) He had died after such a statement 

Essential conditions for the relevancy of dying declaration - 

(1) When it relates to cause of death – When the statement is made by a person as to the cause of his death, or as 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. 

(2) Or is made in course of business – When the statement was made by such person in the ordinary course of business, and in particular when it consists of any entry or memorandum made by him in books kept in the ordinary course of business, or in the discharge of professional duty; or of an acknowledgment written or signed by him of the receipt of money, goods securities or property of any kind; or of a document used in commerce written or signed by him or of the date of a letter or other document usually dated, written or signed by him. 

(3) Or against interest of maker – When the statement is against the pecuniary or proprietary interest of the person making it, or when, if true it would expose him or would have exposed him to criminal prosecution or to a suit for damages. 

(4) Or gives opinion as to public right or custom, or matters of general interest – When the statement gives the opinion of any such person, as to the existence of any public right or custom or matter of public or general interest of the existence of which if it existed, he would have been likely to be aware, and when such statement was made before any controversy as to such right, custom or matter had arisen. 

(5) Or relates to existence of relationship – When the statement relates to the existence of any relationship by blood, marriage or adoption between persons as to whose relationship by blood, marriage or adoption the person making the statement had special means of knowledge, and when the statement was made before the question in dispute was raised. 

(6) Or is made in will or deed relating to family affairs – When the statement relates to the existence of any relationship by blood, marriage or adoption between persons deceased, and is made in any will or deed relating to the affairs of the family to which any such deceased person belonged, or in any family pedigree, or upon any tombstone, family portrait or other thing on which such statements are usually made, and when such statement was made before the question in dispute was raised. 

(7) Or in document relating to transaction mentioned in section 13, Clause (a). – When the statement is contained in any deed, will or another document which relates to any such transaction as is mentioned in Section 13, Clause (a). 

(8) Or is made by several persons and express feelings relevant to the matter in question – When the statement was made by a number of persons and expressed feelings or impressions on their part relevant to the matter in question. 

Illustrations–
(a) The question is, whether A was murdered by B ;
or
A dies of injuries received in a transaction in the course of which she was ravished. The question is, whether she was ravished by B;
or
The question is, whether A was killed by B under such circumstances that a suit would lie against B by A’s widow.
Statements made by A as to the cause of his or her death, referring respectively to the murder, the rape, and the actionable wrong under consideration, are relevant facts.

Dying Declaration is admissible in evidence being hearsay evidence. This piece of hearsay evidence is admissible as an exception to the general rule of evidence that hearsay evidence is no evidence in the eye of law and it should be discarded as a general rule because the evidence in all cases must be direct. 
The basis of the rule as to dying declaration was explained in the early case of R vs Woodcock: explained the general principle:
The proximity of time between statement and death
There has to be a proximate relationship between the statement and the circumstances of death. In Rattan Singh V. H.P. the statement of a woman made before the occurrence in which she did that the accused was standing near her with a gun in his hand and this fact being one of the circumstances of the transaction was held to be admissible as a dying declaration being proximate in point of time and space to the happening. Acceptance of Pakala ruling by Supreme Court. 
It is settled law that it is not safe to convict an accused person on the evidence furnished by a dying declaration without further corroboration because such a statement is not made on oath and is not subjected to cross-examination and because the maker of it might be mentally and physically in a state of confusion. 

F.I.R as dying declarations and statements recorded by police. 
In State of Karnataka vs Shariff, the Supreme Court observed that a dying declaration recorded by police cannot be discarded on the grounds alone. There is no requirement of law that a dying declaration must necessarily made to a magistrate.