Section – 156. Questions tending to corroborate evidence of relevant fact, admissible

When a witness whom it is intended to corroborate gives evidence of any relevant fact, he may be questioned as to any other circumstances which he observed at or near to the time or place at which such relevant fact occurred, if the Court is of opinion that such circumstances, if proved, would corroborate the testimony of the witness as to the relevant fact which he testifies.

Illustration

A, an accomplice, gives an account of a robbery in which he took part. He describes various incidents unconnected with the robbery which occurred on his way to and from the place where it was committed.

Independent evidence of these facts may be given in order to corroborate his evidence as to the robbery itself

Commentary –

We always try to move on a strait path but sometime circumstances pushed us on the zig zag path to reach the destiny.

Section 156 allows parties with the permission of the Court to beat around the bush a little with the intention of connecting the dots and establishing the relevant fact in issue.

Section – 157. Former statements of witness may be proved to corroborate later testimony as to same fact

In order to corroborate the testimony of a witness, any former statement made by such witness relating to the same fact at or about the time when the fact took place, or before any authority legally component to investigate the fact, may be proved.

Commentary

Previous statements given by the witness can also be used to corroborate the later testimony regarding the same fact as prescribed under Section 157of the Act.

The prior statements do not need to be given to the Court, it can be any conversation regarding the facts of the case.

In the case of Rameshwar v. State of Rajasthan, a young girl had been raped and she had told her mother about it. Later that statement of the girl given to her mother was corroborated with her other statements in order to establish the case

Section – 158 – What matters may be proved in connection with proved statement relevant under section 32 or 33

Whenever any statement, relevant under section 32 or 33, is proved, all matters may be proved either in order to contradict or to corroborate it, or in order to impeach or confirm the credit of the person by whom it was made, which might have been proved if that person had been called as a witness and had denied upon cross –examination the truth of the matter suggested.

Commentary –

It is stated in Section 158 of the act that any statement which is relevant under Section 32 or 33 and has been proved, all matters have to be proved in order to confirm or negate it, or for impeaching or crediting the person that made such statement, to the extent as if that person had been called as a witness.