“11. The other statement was recorded by Sub-Inspector Bikram Singh. We do not agree with the appellants' counsel that it is not admissible in evidence, for, in our opinion, it clearly comes under Section 32(1) of the Evidence Act. But its value as a piece of evidence is a different matter altogether. While we are far from suggesting that a police officer is disqualified by any rules of law from recording a dying declaration in exceptional circumstances where resort to a Magistrate or other responsible officer would mean such delay as might prevent the declaration being taken down at all, we are not satisfied why in this case, if reasonable efforts had been made, a Magistrate in the town of Gaya could not have been secured to record the dying declaration. There are other infirmities besides. The declaration was not recorded in the language of the deceased, and apparently not taken down as it was given. It was elicited in answer to questions, but the questions put have not been noted. The learned Judges say that the SubInspector might have been in a hurry to hear the full statement of Nizamuddin, who was nearing his end. But that is precisely the reason why he should have immediately proceeded to write down to the dictation of Nizamuddin without lengthy interrogations. Indeed, it would have taken less time if the statement had been
