Step 1: Understanding the Concept:
Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, is a significant exception to the general rule against hearsay evidence. It makes certain statements made by persons who are dead, cannot be found, have become incapable of giving evidence, or whose attendance cannot be procured without unreasonable delay or expense, relevant and admissible in evidence. The question is incomplete as it does not specify the type of statement, but we can analyze the provided options.
Step 2: Detailed Explanation:
Section 32 has eight clauses, each dealing with a different type of statement. Let's look at the clauses mentioned in the options:
- Section 32(1) (Dying Declaration): Statement as to the cause of one's own death. This is the most famous clause.
- Section 32(2) (Statements in the ordinary course of business): e.g., an entry in a ledger made by a deceased accountant.
- Section 32(3): Statement which is against the pecuniary or proprietary interest of the maker, or which would expose him to a criminal prosecution or a suit for damages. E.g., a statement by a deceased person acknowledging that he owes money to someone.
- Section 32(4): Statement which gives an opinion as to the existence of any public right or custom or matter of public or general interest, made before any controversy had arisen.
- Section 32(5): Statement which relates to the existence of any relationship by blood, marriage or adoption between persons, made by a person with special knowledge and before the question in dispute was raised.
- Section 32(6): Statement relating to the existence of any relationship by blood, marriage or adoption made in any will or deed relating to the affairs of the family, or upon any tombstone, family portrait, etc.
- Section 32(7): Statement in a will or deed relating to a transaction mentioned in Section 13(a).
- Section 32(8): Statement by several persons expressing feelings relevant to the matter in question.
All the given options, (A) S.32(3), (B) S.32(4), (C) S.32(5), and (D) S.32(6), describe situations where a statement by a deceased person is relevant. Without the specific type of statement being mentioned in the question, it's impossible to pick one correct option. The question is flawed. However, all of them fall under the general principle that a statement by a dead person can be a relevant fact under Section 32.