LIVE Online Course on NDPS by Riva Pocha and Adv. Taraq Sayed. Starting from 24th May. Register Now!!
LAW Courses

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Anish goyal (Advocate)     06 December 2009

D/b substantive and corroborative piece of evidence

Can any learned member elaborate the difference between substantive and corroborative piece of evidence. Please provide a case also telling the difference.


Learning

 5 Replies

N.K.Assumi (Advocate)     06 December 2009

Dear Goyal, I am of the view that Corraborative evidence is evidence supporting the evidence that has already been let in. Say for eg; previous statements made by a person and recorded on tape, can be used not only to corraborate the evidence given by witness in court but also to contradict the evidence given before the court, as well as to test the veracity of the witness and also to impeach his impartiality. Whereas substantive evidence are those evidence which are direct and cogent evidence to support it on which criminal trial based on it, eg; post mortem report, recovery of arms,explosive from the scene of occurence are treated as substantial and undisputed evidence. the two are like primary and secondary evidence.

1 Like

N.K.Assumi (Advocate)     06 December 2009

Two important case that I know of are: 2005-(006)-SCALE-0177-SC: 1999-(002)-CCR-0100-SC.

1 Like

PJANARDHANA REDDY (ADVOCATE & DIRECTOR)     06 December 2009

 PLS FIND D 127 PAGES JUDGMNT DELIVERED BY MY FATHER'S ELDEDEST BROTHER,P.VENKATARAM REDDI(RETIRED JUSTICE SC)


Attached File : 51 51 corrobarative evidence ponaka v reddi.rar downloaded: 399 times
1 Like

Shree. ( Advocate.)     06 December 2009

Dear Anish Ji,

 In Rajendra singh vs. State of U.P – (2007) 7 SCC 378 the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that,

  A statement under Section 161 Cr. P. C is not a substantive piece of evidence.  In view of the provision to Section 162 (1) CrPC, the said statement can be used only for the limited purpose of contradicting the maker thereof in the manner laid down in the said proviso.  Therefore, the High Court committed a manifest error of law in relying upon wholly inadmissible evidence in recording a finding that Respondent 2 could not have been present at the scene of commission of the crime.”

 

          Section 164 Cr. P. C. Statement – It can be used for corroboration or contradiction.  In Sunil Kumar and others vs. State of M.P. reported in AIR 1997 SC 940 the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that,

    “20. .... This conclusion of ours, however, does not in any way affect the merits of the prosecution case for we find that immediately after PW 1 was taken to the hospital his statement was recorded as a dying declaration which, consequent upon survival, is to be treated only as a statement recorded under Section 164 Cr. P. C and can be used for corroboration or contradiction. ....”

Hope You be cleared now........

1 Like

Daksh (Student)     11 December 2009

Thank you all for such enlightening info.

Daksh


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  


Start a New Discussion Unreplied Threads



Popular Discussion


view more »




Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query