This Article is written by Shatakshi Singh & this article discuss the concept of The burden of Proof Under the Indian Evidence Act
Introduction
One of the fundamental components of the legal system is the Indian Evidence Act. The most significant law that forms the basis of the disagreement is the law of evidence. A statement or piece of information that supports a statement and enables the court to reach an unbiased verdict is called evidence. To support or refute the statements made by both parties, the court must hear testimony or see written proof. Under the Rules of Evidence, interested parties must provide the strongest proof possible to substantiate their claims beyond a reasonable doubt
What is the Burden of Proof?
A party must establish the validity or invalidity of a claim using the facts and supporting documentation by the legal standard known as the burden of proof. The burden of proof normally falls with the party making the claim, and in most instances, that party is the one whose claim is legitimate and who has the burden of proof. The legal definition of “bearing of evidence” is vague, but the fundamental tenet of the system is that the burden of proof rests with the accused until their guilt is established.
Section 101 of the Indian Evidence Act
“Whoever desires any Court to give judgment as to any legal right or liability dependent on the existence of facts which he asserts, must prove that those facts exist. When a person is bound to prove the existence of any fact, it is said that the burden of proof lies on that person.”
According to the clause, one must provide proof of the facts he believes to be true and right to seek a judgment or order from the courts or authorities. It is believed that the burden of proof is with the individual who must provide evidence for the stated claim. The following illustrations will aid in a better understanding of this idea:
- It is Ram’s responsibility to provide evidence if he believes that Shyam has committed a crime and that he should be held accountable for it.
Section 102 of the Indian Evidence Act
“On whom burden of proof lies. —The burden of proof in a suit or proceeding lies on that person who would fail if no evidence at all were given on either side.”
Who has the burden of proof is specified in this clause. The party who stands to lose in a lawsuit or other legal proceeding typically bears the burden of proof. This indicates that, as the individual who filed the complaint or lawsuit, he must provide evidence to support his position. If the person submitting the complaint or lawsuit is unable to persuade the court with the evidence they have, they will be responsible for the loss. As an example:
- Sunil has filed a lawsuit asserting his ownership of the land that Anil is in possession of. In this case, the person who stands to lose if the claim is not proven bears the burden of evidence. Therefore, Anil will keep ownership of the land and Sunil will suffer from losing it if Sunil cannot demonstrate that the land is his.
Section 103 of the Indian Evidence Act
“Burden of proof as to particular fact. —The burden of proof as to any particular fact lies on that person who wishes the Court to believe in its existence unless it is provided by any law that the proof of that fact shall lie on any particular person.”
The burden of proof about a specific incident or fact is the major topic of discussion in this section. It is up to the individual wishing for the court to accept a certain fact as true to provide evidence for it. Put simply, it means that an individual must provide the court with proof if they want the court to accept the tale they have told. As an example:
- Chirag claims that he was at his uncle’s house and not at home when his neighbour was killed. In this instance, Chirag must provide evidence that he was in his uncle’s residence.
Section 104 of the Indian Evidence Act
“Burden of proving fact to be proved to make evidence admissible.—The burden of proving any fact necessary to be proved in order to enable any person to give evidence of any other fact is on the person who wishes to give such evidence.”
According to this provision, the person wishing to prove another fact bears the responsibility of proving the first one to establish the second one or to offer further proof. This implies that it will be the person’s responsibility to prove both sets of facts or statements if they wish to present specific evidence or prove something else that calls for the proof of another set of facts or statements. Illustration:
Anita has made a final declaration, according to Nita. Nita must demonstrate Anita’s death before it can be proven that Anita made a final statement. As a result, Nita bears the burden of proving both facts.
Section 105 of the Indian Evidence Act
“Burden of proving that case of accused comes within exceptions. —When a person is accused of any offence, the burden of proving the existence of circumstances bringing the case within any of the General Exceptions in the Indian Penal Code, (45 of 1860), or within any special exception or proviso contained in any other part of the same Code, or in any law defining the offence, is upon him, and the Court shall presume the absence of such circumstances.”
According to this clause, the onus of proof is on the accused in situations where he claims—or defends—that the incident qualifies as an exception. When someone is charged with a crime and argues that a certain situation existed, they must provide evidence of the same. In these situations, the law presumes that there were no such circumstances. As an example:
Mr. Shetty is charged with Mr. Gulati’s murder. The burden of proof is with Mr. Shetty to demonstrate that Mr. Gulati was killed by him in self-defense after a serious and unexpected provocation. Mr. Shetty argues that the death was not murder but rather self-defense as Mr. Gulati was ready to shoot him.
Burden of proof in case of Civil Cases
A civil proceeding that someone files includes two components. The case’s facts are the first, and the legal justification is the second. In these situations, the plaintiff—the party who files the civil lawsuit—bears the burden of proof.
This implies that even if the defendant makes no defense or assertions, he will still prevail in the case if the plaintiff is unable to present evidence and proof or persuade the court that the facts are real. Consequently, rather than convincingly establishing their position in such cases, the defendants typically attempt to undermine the plaintiff’s argument in some manner.
Burden of proof in case of Criminal Cases
The most significant rule is usually that one is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty. As a result, the prosecution bears the primary burden of proof since it must persuade the court that the accused has committed a crime. If and when the accused asserts something or asserts one of the exceptions to the crime, the burden of proof may alter.
In this situation, the accused will have the duty of proving the exception or claim. The burden of proof is largely on the prosecution because they must establish their case beyond a reasonable doubt, which gives the accused or defendant a significant advantage.
Case laws
Savithri Vs Karthyayani Amma[1]– Each party had to prove its allegations
In this specific instance, the issue included the implementation of a will by coercion. The court ruled that each side had to provide evidence to support its claims, which implies the party claiming that compulsion was used to execute the will must do the same.
Arjun Panditrao Khotkar Vs. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal and Ors.[2] – The burden of proof about the electronic evidence being authentic and correct is upon the person producing the same
The evidence in this instance was given electronically. Regarding the genuineness of the same, there was some doubt. In the current case, the court determined that the onus of proving the authenticity and accuracy of the electronic evidence is with the individual presenting it. The individual bearing the burden of proof about the electronic evidence will also handle the electronic document that was submitted and proves the point that it was made.
Conclusion
The burden of proof has been discussed in detail in the Indian Evidence Act of 1872. The burden of proof differs depending on the needs and requirements of both criminal and civil cases. The primary idea is that, absent a particular legal requirement for someone else to provide evidence or establish the existence of a fact, the burden of proof rests with the individual making the claim for relief or any related orders or judgment from the court. Until a person is shown to be guilty by a court of law, they are presumed innocent. As a result, it is the Plaintiff’s responsibility to establish the defendant’s guilt.
References
- Ranchhoddas, R. and Thakore, D.D. (1919) The indian evidence act. Bombay: Bombay Law Reporter Office.
- Savithri Vs Karthyayani Amma Appeal (civil) 4882 of 2007
- Arjun Panditrao Khotkar Vs. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal and Ors. (MANU/SC/0521/2020)
