The hearsay rule is classically defined as “an assertion other than one made by a person while giving oral evidence in the proceedings is inadmissible as evidence of any fact asserted”. The major justifications for the exclusion of hearsay at common law are that such evidence is potentially dangerous as there is the possibility of fabrication by witness by the fact that such evidence is not given under oath and that it poses difficulty in assessing the weight and reliability of the statement as the truth of the evidence is unknown. On the other hand, renowned academicians have expressed concerns that the consequences of hearsay rule can lead to cogent evidence being excluded. Certain hearsay evidence are said to be “credible, probative, and reliable, can give a better-rounded picture of what happened, and can be better than no evidence at all”