Supreme Court of India Judgement: Pakala Narayana Swami vs King Emperor

Pakala Narayana Swami vs King Emperor

Pakala Narayana Swami vs King Emperor


Pakala Narayana Swami. V. King Emperor

Citation: (1939) 41 BOMLR 428

Judges: Atkin, Wright, Porter, Rankin, Thankerton

Number of Judges: 5


Pakala narayana swami (deceased) had given 3000 rupees to the accused a number of times. The accused had then moved to Beharpur. From there, she has written the letter to the deceased saying, to come to beharpur and collect the money which he had given her as loan. So, the deceased had shown the letter to his wife saying that he was going to Beharpur to collect the money which he had given to the accused. Then he took the train to Beharpur.

Three days later, his dead body was found in a trunk in “puri” train. The wife of the deceased  went into the appeal at High Court of Beharpur, where she thought that the case would come under Beharpur’s  jurisdiction. The High Court had given the judgement in favour of the accused.

The Wife of the deceased then went into Special appeal.

The Accused had, then pointed out that under section 25 of Indian Evidence Act, the Declaration of the dead person is in-admissable. But, the evidence was corrobrated to the circumstantial and the “dhoby” had proved to the court beyond the reasonable doubt that, he had seen both the couple had brought the customised trunk to home.

A person/witness had even said that he has seen the accused’s husband at the railway station. After the investigation was done, the police had gathered the evidence by “Test Information Parade” (section. 19 of Indian Evidence Act).

All the evidence gathered proved before the court beyond reasonable doubt that both the accused and the accused’s husband were together in this case.


Can the letter shown to the deceased’s wife be taken as Deying Declaration?

Was the section 25 of the Inidian Evidence act in contravention with the 32(1) of the Indian Evidence Act?

Issues answered:

  1. Yes, the section. 32 of Indian Evidnce act lays down that, whatever statements made by the person dying will be considered as Dying Declaration. This Evidence will not only be taken into consideration but also will be appriciated in the said case.
  2.  Whatever the person who has made the statements before dying and has been brought before the court as evidence should be given importance and should be taken into the said case.



The court on the said case  delivered that, “ whatever had been said and brought before to the court by the accused have no credibility and the contention raised regarding the inadmissabilty of the dying declaration under section 25 of Indian Evidence Act is admissible. Section 32 (1) of Indian Evidence Act makes all the words spoken/written are uncontestedly to be admissable by the court.

The Court was satisfied with the investigation of the police and the evidence produced before the court were appreciated. The accused was charged with 302 of Indian Penal Code, 201 of Indian Penal Code. The other accused among the couple was charged with 201 and 120 B of Indian Penal Code”.

Jugements referred:

Azimuddy v. King Emperor

Sections referred:

302 of I.p.c

201 of I.P.C

32(1) OF Indian Evidence Act.

120 B of I.P.C


Ashok Kumar Lakkaraju is an avid and sincere learner, researcher & writer and is currently pursuing B.A.LL.B at Damodaram Sanjivayya National Law University.

(Visited 2,333 times, 2 visits today)