The Indian Law of Hearsay Evidence

The probative force of such facts is clearly dependent on the truth or honesty of the statment yet these writers hold Such statements to be original evidence declaring that they patake of the nature Of spontaneous utterances from which an inference may be drawn as from the bellowing of a coy deprived of her calf or the cry of a hound on the scent of game. [...] This is not the place to discuss the true scope and limitation of these rules but an example may be given from the liligest of the Law of Evidence of the danger of applying them without considering the prposition which the evidence is offered to estalish. [...] The author of the Digest is unable to explain the admission of the evidence but he points out that it could not have been admitted as a statement made in the.presence of the prisoner because the window was closed. [...] In other words the statement is admissible to prove that the man who fired the gun is the prisoner Itecause if the prisoner is the man who fired the gun the statement was made in the presence of the prisoner. [...] The sufficiency or insufficiency of the sanction for the truth of the relevant fact con-"( 13 ) veyed by the statement constitutes in the theory the principle which governs the rules for the admission and exclusion of hearsay.