650 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
person legally complain to investigate the fact, then to be admissible, must have been made at or about the time when the fact took place. This condition does not apply to a previous statement made before a person having authority to inquire.
25 Mad. 210.
Illus.
(i) A statement by a girl, alleging that she was raped made immediately after the rape, is admissible.
(ii) The dying declaration of a man, who chances to live, is admissible as a corroborative piece of evidence.
(iii) The first information given to the police is admissible as corroborative evidence of the testimony of the informant.
(iv) The Panchnama is admissible as a corroborative.
Two points must be urged by way of caution.
(1) The use of statements made to the police in the course of investigation under Section 162, Criminal Procedure Code. These are also previous statements made before a person who is authorised to investigate.
Can they be used for the purposes of corroboration ?
At one time it was held that they could be so used.
36 Cal. 281.
35 Mad. 397.
39 Bom. 58.
The Amendment to Section 162 of the Criminal Procedure Code excludes both the written record and viva voce statement made to the Police. Though previous statements, they cannot be used as a corroboration.
(2) The distinction between corroborative evidence and substantive evidence is important, because, on this depends the use of corroborative evidence. Corroborative evidence is not substantive evidence.
Illus.
In a trial of a prisoner, the depositions of witnesses given in a previous trial of other persons charged with having been