Unit III - Method of Proof of Facts - Presumptions.pptx

Law of Evidence

1. Presumption May presume, Shall presume and Conclusive proof Section 4.- “May presume”- Whenever it is provided by this Act that Court may presume a fact, it may either regard such fact as proved, unless and until it is disproved, or may call for proof of it; “Shall presume”- Whenever it is directed by this Act that the Court shall presume a fact, it shall regard such fact as proved, unless and until it is disproved; “Conclusive proof”- When one fact is declared by this act to be conclusive proof of another, the Court shall, on proof of the one fact, regard the other as proved, and shall not allow evidence to be given for the purpose of disproved.

2. Principles of May Presume, Shall Presume and Conclusive Proof May Presume is a situation when the court can apply the power of discretion and presume any facts/facts and recognize it to be a proven one or can also ask for evidence of a confirming nature to check or re-check the presumption set by it. It is governed by Section 4 of the Indian Evidence Act and it can be disapproved by the other party. It is not a branch of Jurisprudence. The Shall Presume signifies a strong claim or aims to determine any fact. It is governed by Section 4 of the Indian Evidence Act where the notion of shall presume is also known as Rebuttable Presumption of Law/ Obligatory Presumption/ Artificial Presumption. The Court does not have discretionary power in this case but regards the facts as proved until disapproved. It is a branch of Jurisprudence. Presumptions refer to those presumptions which are not fully created based Conclusiveon logic but also on the credence that these presumptions are needed for the welfare of society in general. The law has full unquestioned power and does not allow the conclusive presumptions to be questioned and challenged even if the presumption on which conclusive proof is based is questioned and challenged.

3. PRESUMPTION Definition of evidence under the Indian Evidence Act. As per Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Evidence means the following: Any statement made by the witnesses which refers to the matter under investigation before the court which has been permitted or required by it. Any document presented before the court for inspection by it. It also includes e-records within its ambit. Equal to Proof Equal to being Relevant Equal to Material. Different Types of Evidence Types of Presumptions The common law approach traditionally has classified presumptions into two categories only however to avoid any haziness/doubt/uncertainty a third presumption has also been added by the Courts of India. The categories are as follows: Presumption of Facts Presumption of Laws Mixed Presumptions

4. Distinction between Presumption of Fact and Presumption of Law- 1. Presumption of Fact is based on logic, human experience and law of nature. Presumption of law is based on provisions of law. 2. Presumption of fact is always rebuttable and goes away when explained or rebutted by establishment of positive proof. Presumption of law is conclusive unless rebutted as provided under rule giving rise to presumption. 3. The position of presumption of fact is uncertain and transitory. The position of presumption of law is certain and uniform. 4. The court can ignore presumption of fact however strong it is. The court cannot ignore presumption of law. 5. The presumption of facts is derived on basis of law of nature, prevalent customs and human experience. Presumption of laws is derived on established judicial norms and they have become part of legal rules. 6. The court can exercise its discretion while drawing presumption of fact i.e., presumption of facts is discretionary presumption. Presumption of law is mandatory i.e., court is bound to draw presumption of law.

5. Presumption of Facts- Presumptions of facts refer to those interpretations that are derived logically and practically based on observations and surroundings in the course of basic human conduct. Section 86- Certified and True Duplicates of Judicial Records of Foreign Nations Section 87- Presumption related to Charts, Maps, and Books. Section 88- Presumption of Messages of Telegraphic Nature. Section 90- Presumption of documents of 30 years old Section 113 A- Presumption as to the abetment of suicide by a woman who is married. Section 113B- Presumption as to the abetment of suicide by a woman who is married with relation to dowry death.

6. Presumption of Law- They refer to those interpretations and principles that are assumed by the law on their own and need not be proved before the court as it is presumed by law to be already a proven one. These interpretations and principles are further divided into 2 categories. They are as follows: Rebuttable Presumptions of Law: These refer to those presumptions which are regarded as good quality evidence and until proven contrary they do not lose their quality. They do not easily measure the degree of the presumption as they only are legitimate presumptions unless proven incorrect. The best example is the offenses of matrimonial offenses as in these type of offenses the chances of getting evidence is low. Thus the essence of presumption in these cases is important. There are three such provisions essential to matrimonial offenses and are as follows:

7. Rebuttable Presumptions of Law: May presume and Shall presume of section 4 Section 112- A Legitimate Proof is Birth During Marriage Section 113A- A Legitimate Presumption is the death of a woman who is married and is termed of abetment of a suicide woman in 7 years of marriage. Section 113B- A Legitimate Presumption is the death of a woman within 7 years of marriage regarding dowry Irrebuttable Presumptions of Law: Conclusive proof of section 4 Irrebuttable Presumption- Such presumptions cannot be challenged as conclusive proof and no requirement of additional evidence is required.

8. Mixed Presumptions- Mixed presumptions are a combination of both Presumptions of Fact and Presumptions of Law. In the English Legal System, the mixed presumption is only found in the statutes which deal with Real Property. However, in The Indian Legal System, these presumptions are specifically mentioned and the statute which deals with them is the Indian Evidence Act. Mixed Presumptions have different provisions when the court exercises its discretionary power when it raises presumptions with the help of Principles of Conclusive Proof, May Presume, and Shall Presume.

9. Conclusion : The Indian Legal System makes use of presumptions in order to better provide judicial rulings. These presumptions are divided into three categories: mixed presumptions, presumptions of law. The Court also has the discretionary authority to determine whether a presumption is based on law, fact, or error. The Principles of Conclusive Proof, May Presume, and Shall Presume are used by the courts to decide this. In Tukaram v State of Maharashtra (2021, September 2), On the basis of the circumstances of Mathura Rape Case, where the Court explained that the basic need and need of the such presumptions while adjudicating the case. Another aspect of Presumptions that the Court noted is that they have a wider scope than just helping an individual in a swift or easy trial. Presumptions which can be help to the Indian judiciary deliver justice quickly and thoroughly to society.