The burden of proof is a fundamental concept in both civil and criminal law, determining which party is responsible for proving or disproving a fact in a legal proceeding. It is crucial for ensuring fairness in litigation and helps the court in ascertaining the truth by directing the parties regarding their evidentiary obligations. The Indian Evidence Act, 1872, particularly Sections 101–114, provides a detailed framework for understanding the burden of proof, its types, and exceptions.
Meaning and Concept
Burden of proof refers to the duty of a party to prove the allegations it makes in court. In simple terms, if a party asserts a fact, it is that party’s responsibility to provide evidence supporting it. Failure to discharge this burden can result in adverse consequences, including dismissal of claims or acquittal in criminal cases.
It is different from onus of proof, which may sometimes shift during a trial depending on circumstances.
Legal Framework in India
Under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872:
- Section 101: The general rule states that the person who alleges a fact is responsible for proving it.
- Sections 102–114: Provide exceptions, special provisions, and reversal of burden in certain cases, including presumptions of law and fact.
Key Sections
- Section 101 – Burden of Proof:
The general principle is that the prosecution bears the burden in criminal cases, while the plaintiff bears it in civil cases. - Section 102 – Burden of Proof as to Particular Fact:
If a fact is especially within the knowledge of a party, that party must prove it. - Section 103 – Burden of Proof as to Fact to be Proved by Evidence:
When a fact is to be proved, the party who wishes to rely on it must produce sufficient evidence. - Section 104 – Burden of Proving that Case of Defendant Comes Within Exception:
The defendant must prove exceptions or special defenses, such as consent or alibi. - Sections 105–114: Include reversal of burden in specific criminal cases (like dowry death, sexual offences) and presumption provisions.
Types of Burden of Proof
- Legal Burden:
- Also called burden of law or onus probandi.
- Lies on the party who must prove the fact as per law.
- Example: In criminal cases, the prosecution has the legal burden to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
- Evidential Burden:
- Obligation to produce prima facie evidence to raise an issue.
- Can shift during trial based on facts presented.
- Example: Once the accused raises a defense of insanity, the evidential burden shifts to provide evidence supporting it.
Also Read: Reserve Bank of India (RBI) & Its Role
Burden of Proof in Civil and Criminal Cases
| Aspect | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases |
|---|---|---|
| Who bears the burden | Plaintiff | Prosecution |
| Standard of proof | Preponderance of probabilities | Beyond reasonable doubt |
| Exceptions | Presumptions under law, e.g., Sections 101–114 | Presumptions in Sections 105–114, e.g., dowry death, sexual offences |
Shifting of Burden of Proof
In certain circumstances, the burden shifts from one party to another:
- Statutory Presumptions:
- Section 114 allows courts to presume certain facts unless disproved.
- Example: Court may presume death after seven years of disappearance.
- Criminal Exceptions:
- Section 105(2) CrPC – In dowry death, the accused must prove absence of cruelty.
- Section 112 of Evidence Act – Presumption of legitimacy of child born during marriage.
- Doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitur:
- “The thing speaks for itself.”
- Burden shifts to the defendant to disprove negligence or liability.
Key Principles
- Prosecution’s Burden in Criminal Cases:
- The prosecution must prove every ingredient of the offence beyond reasonable doubt.
- Plaintiff’s Burden in Civil Cases:
- The plaintiff must establish the existence of a right or claim by preponderance of probabilities.
- Defendant’s Burden in Certain Cases:
- Special defenses, presumptions, or statutory exceptions require the defendant to prove facts in support.
- Evidence Must Be Relevant and Credible:
- Mere allegations are insufficient; facts must be supported by credible evidence.
Important Case Laws
- Kartar Singh v. State of Punjab (1994) 3 SCC 569:
Established that prosecution must prove the accused’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt. - State of Maharashtra v. Somnath Yashwant Deshpande (1998) 7 SCC 309:
Highlighted the evidential burden in cases of statutory presumptions. - Shafhi Mohammad v. State of Himachal Pradesh (2018) 2 SCC 801:
Clarified the standard of proof and the burden of evidence in criminal proceedings. - Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab (1980) 2 SCC 684:
Discussed burden in capital punishment cases, emphasizing proof beyond reasonable doubt.
Conclusion
The burden of proof is central to the administration of justice. It ensures fair trial, accountability, and judicial efficiency by clearly defining which party must prove which fact. While the general rule favors the party making an allegation, statutory provisions and judicial interpretations allow for flexibility and fairness, especially in cases involving special defenses, presumptions, or social justice considerations.
Also Read: Supreme Court Refuses to Intervene in Telangana HC Order Staying OBC Quota Hike in Local Bodies