Introduction:
“The Burden of Proof" is what is legally required in order for a person bringing a case to prove the case in the court. So, burden to prove is on the person bringing the case. In a civil case, as plaintiff brings a case in the court, so the burden of proof is on the plaintiff with the relevant evidences. Burden of proof clearly states “who is responsible to prove the case" and “what level of proof is required". And in a criminal case, it is upon the state, they have to prove the charges. Since, defendant is presumed to be innocent so it is on the other party to bring enough evidences to prove that the defendant is guilty.
The best way to picture the jury way while dealing with the case is to picture a staircase and at top of the stairs is the place where person is found “Guilty” and at the very bottom of the stairs
i.e., before the first step of the stairs is “No evidence”. Anytime someone brings a case against a person at the beginning of the trial, it starts with “No evidence”, because no one has proved anything yet.
The Law of Evidence is the process that helps the court's in their proceeding and to reach to their conclusion. Evidence is a form of material that help's in creating contention or declaration in making court's to come to a decision. Evidence could be in an oral form or in a documentary form. These evidences are to be produced in front of the court to prove the claims placed before a court, while, accusing the other party. These evidences placed before the court should be able to establish their declarations beyond the reasonable doubt.
The burden of proof is clearly defined under the Section 101 of the Law of Evidence Act, stating that when a person is bound to prove the existence of any fact, the burden of proving lies on that person.
Illustration: Z wants court to punish X, because X committed the murder of Z's wife due to personal grudges. So, in order to prove the assertion, Z have to lay evidences before the court against X.
Principles of Burden of Proof:
The principle of Burden of proof is based on onus probandi(burden of proof) and factum probans(proving a fact).
In criminal cases, it is abiding that the prosecution have to prove with the help of evidences that the accused has committed a crime. But if prosecution is not successful to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty, in that case the accused will be set free. As in Ouseph v. State of Kerala, (2004) 4 SC 446: AIR 2004 SC 2088, where the appellant was charged under section 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985(NDPS Act) by a Session court, since the charged was not able to be proved beyond reasonable doubt, due to which the appellant was set free.
In Banwar Lal v. Road Transport, A.I.R 1989 Pat.303, since the goods were lost during the time of the carriage, so, it is upon the carrier to prove that his negligence had no part to play in the case.
In matrimonial cases, the party who have filed for the divorce have to prove reasonable reasons for the divorce. Thus, the burden of proof lies on the party who applied for the divorce.
Section 102:
This section relates to the person upon whom the burden of proof lies and whose stance will fail if no evidence is produced by either of the parties. The burden of proof lies on a party who have laid down the declaration of facts rather than the one who denies the facts.
Illustration: X sues Y, for taking away the possession of family heirloom, which X claim belongs to him due to the will. In this case of no evidence is produced by the either sides, in that case Y will get the family heirloom.
Section 103:
The section lays down the duty of burden of proof upon the party who wishes the court to accept the fact laid down by him and wants the court to take action against the other party.
Illustration: M conducted the act of theft in the house of N. N claims to have seen the whole incident. So, for the court to believe N's fact, N have to produce evidences that proves that M is accused of committing theft.
Section 104:
The section states that if one fact's acceptance depends on the acceptance of other fact in that case, the party who wants to prove, will have to prove the fact that makes the subsequent fact admissible.
Illustration: X wants to prove dying declaration of Y, in this case firstly X must prove Y's death.
Section 105:
This section refers to the kind of benefits which are provided to the accused which works in a positive manner for an accused. The general principle lays down that the accused is presumed as an innocent until and unless the prosecution establishes the guilt with the help of evidences. When the guilt is established, than the burden of proof shifts to the accused who can use the defence of Indian Penal Code.
The level of proving laid down on the accused under section 105, is very low as compared to that of the burden of proving upon the prosecution in similar circumstances. An accused while proving don't have to bring evidences beyond reasonable doubt while proving his innocence.
Burden upon Affirmation :
The Indian Evidence Act follows the principle that whoever lays down the statement of facts on that person burden of proof shifts. The reason behind is that if a person is claiming something, he needs to prove the same.
Illustration: A stated that B died few days back due to an accident, so in this case A have to prove the same.
Conclusion :
In summary, the burden of proof states that the person who makes the claim have to prove the same. As in criminal cases, the defendant is presumed innocent until and unless proved guilty. The party against whom claim is being made is under no obligation to prove his innocence. Burden of proof does not refer to the amount of evidences provided, but to produce the quality of the evidence produced is important.
References:
- https://www.nals.org/blogpost/1359892/300369/Burden-of-Proof-An-Essay-of-Definition
- https://www.britannica.com/topic/burden-of-proof
- https://law.jrank.org/pages/4927/Burden-Proof.html
.jpeg)
