Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023
Section 160
Former statements of witness may be proved to corroborate later testimony as to
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 competent to investigate the fact, may be proved.
Why this exists
This provision continues a long-standing rule from the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (Section 157), carried into the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023. Courts often worry that a witness's memory may fade or that their testimony might be doubted as a later invention. Allowing an earlier, contemporaneous statement — made near the time of the event or to an investigating authority — helps show that the witness has been consistent, supporting the reliability of their current account.
How courts read it
Under the corresponding provision in the 1872 Act, courts have held that such former statements are used only for corroboration, not as independent proof of the facts stated. Judgments have clarified that the earlier statement must relate to the same facts and be given at a time or to an authority that makes it credible — for example, a First Information Report or statement to police can serve this corroborative purpose, but cannot substitute for the witness's testimony in court.
Common misconceptions
- Myth: The former statement itself is treated as proof of the facts it describes.
Fact: Courts have clarified that it is only used to support (corroborate) the witness's current testimony, not as independent evidence of what happened. - Myth: Any statement made at any time can be used this way.
Fact: The statement must have been made at or near the time of the event, or given to someone with legal authority to investigate it — not any casual statement made later.