THELAW OFEVI

DENCE

TOPI
C:PRESUMPTI
ON

ANASSI
GNMENT
SUBMI
TTEDTOTHE
UNI
VERSI
TYI
NSTI
TUTEOFLAW

PANJABUNI
VERSI
TYREGI
ONALCENTRE,
LUDHI
ANA

B.
A.LL.
B.
2020-
2021

SUPERVI
SEDBY: SUBMI
TTEDBY:

Dr
.Suni
lMi
tt
al AdeshPar
tap
Rol
lno.
:47

UNI
VERSI
TYINSTITUTEOFLAW,PANJABUNI
VERSI
TY,
REGIONALCENTRE,
LUDHIANA

1
 ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Iwi shtoexpressmyhear tf
eltgrati
tudetoDr .Suni lMitt
al,my
ment orandsuper vi
sorforthisterm paper.Ithasbeenunder
herconst antandsincereguidance,auspi cesandmot i
vati
on
thatIhav ebeenabletogett hroughwi t
ht hi
st erm paper.She
hav eli
ghtedthepat hformewi t
hherexper t
iseandat tenti
on
throughoutthecour seoft histerm paperandi twoul dnot
hav ebeenpossibletohavecomet hroughwi thther esearchif
notf orherpersi
stentcounseli
ngandper suasion.Ifeelhighl
y
i
ndebt edt other
econcer nandi nvolvementi nther eali
zati
on
ofthisstudy.
Iwouldalsoli
ket othankProf
.(Mr.
)RaviI
nderSi nghfor
bei
ngt hecor
nerst
oneofsupportandenl
i
ghtenmentf oras
l
ongasIhav ebeenconcernedwit
hthemaki
ngoft hister
m
paper
.
Iwoul dli
ketothankt hestaffofthel i
brar
yofUni versi
ty
Inst
itut
e of Laws, Panjab Universi
ty Regional Centr
e,
Ludhianaf
orprovi
dingmealltherel
evantbooksandmat eri
al
forthecompl
eti
onofmyassi gnment.
Lastl
y,Iwoul dtakeanoppor t
unit
ytothankfami
ly,f
ri
ends
andassociatesforput
ti
ngupandst i
cki
ngupfr
om endtoend
oftheprogressi
onofthisr
esearch.

AdeshPar
tap

2
 TABLEOFCONTENTS

S.
NO. TOPI
C PAGENO.

1. Acknowl
edgment 2

2. Li
stsofAbbr
evi
ati
ons 4

3. I
ntr
oduct
ion 5

4. Sect
ion4,
IEA 6

5. Ki
ndsofPr
esumpt
ions 7

6. Pr
esumpt
ionoff
act 7

7. Pr
esumpt
ionofl
aw 8

8. Disti
ngui
shb/wPresumpt
ionoff
actandPr
esumpt
ion 10
oflaw
9. MixedPresumpt
ions 10

10. Maypr
esume 11

11. Shal
lpr
esume 12

12. Concl
usi
vepr
oof 13

13. Concl
usi
on 14

14. Bi
bli
ogr
aphy 15

3
 LI
STOFABBREVI
ATI
ONS

1.AIR–Al lIndiaReporter
2.Anr.–Anot her
3.Cr.
P.C.–Cr iminal
ProcedureCode
4.Crl
.-Cr i
mi nal
5.IPC–I ndianPenal Code
6.No.–Number
7.Ors.–Ot her s
8.S.–Sect i
on
9.SC–Supr emeCour t
10.SCC–Supr emeCour tCases
11.Vs./V.–Ver sus
12.U/S–UnderSect i
on

LI
STOFCASES
1.Nil
akanthaPativStat
eofOri
ssa
2.Mangal Ram &AnorvStat
eofMadhy
aPr
adesh
3.Shanti
v.Stat
eofHar y
ana
4.Chit
oMaht oovLilaMahto
5.Tukaram vStat
eofMaharasht
ra

4
I
ntr
oduct
ion
Presumpt i
ongenerallymeansapr ocessofascer t
ainingf ew factsont he
basi sofpossibil
it
yori ti
st heconsequenceofsomeact singener alwhich
str
engt hent hepossibi
li
tyandwhensuchpossi bil
i
tyhasgr eatsubstanti
ate
valuet hengenerall
yfactscanbeascer tai
ned.Presumpt i
onsar einferences
whi char edrawnbyt hecour twit
hr especttotheexistenceofcer tainfacts.
Whencer t
ainfactsar epresumedt obei nexist
encet hepar tyinwhose
favourt heyarepresumedt oexistneednotdi scharget hebur denofpr oof
withr especttoit.Thisi sanexcept i
ont othegener alrulethatt hepar ty
whi challegestheexistenceofcer tainfactshasthei nit
ialburdenofpr oof
butpr esumpt i
onsdoawaywi t
hthisrequirement.

Presumptionscanbedefi
nedasanaff
ir
mati
veornegativ
einfer
encedrawn
aboutt hetruthorfal
sehoodofafactbyusingapr ocessofpr obabl
e
reasoni
ngf rom whatistakent
obegr ant
ed.A presumptionissaidto
operatewher ecer
tai
nfactaret
akentobeinexist
enceev enther
ei sno
completeproof.

Apr esumpt i
oni sar ulewher ei fonef actwhi chisknownast hepr imary
factisprovedbyapar tythenanot herfactwhi chisknownast hepr esumed
factistakenaspr ov edifthereisnocont raryevidenceoft hesame.I ti
sa
standardpracticewher ecer t
ainfactsar etreatedinauni f
orm mannerwi th
regardtot heireffectaspr oofofcer t
ainot herf act
s.Itisani nference
drawnf r
om f actswhichar eknownandpr oved.Presumpt i
onisar ulewhi ch
i
susedbyj udgesandcour t
st odr aw inferencefrom apar ti
cularf actor
evidenceunlesssuchani nferenceissaidt obedi sproved.

Presumpti
onsaredrawnfrom thecourseofnat ur
eforinstance,t
hatt he
nightwi
llfol
l
owday,thesummerwi l
lfol
lowt hewint
er,deat
hensuesf rom
themortalwoundandtheli
ke.Theymayal sobedrawnf r
om thecourseof
humanaf f
air
s,fr
om t
heusageoft hesocietyandtr
ansacti
onsinbusiness,
e.g.
,
i
. A watchofRam i sstol
enandsoonaf teri
tisrecoveredfrom the
possessi
on of Shy am. There shall be a nat ural infer
ence
(pr
esumption)thatShyam ei
therst
olenthewatchhimselforrecei
ved
i
tfrom somet hi
efknowingittobestol
en.

5
i
i
. From thef actthatal et
terhasbeenpost ed,thenat ur
alinfer
ence
(presumption)wouldbet hati
treachedtheaddr essee.(
ii
i)Af i
lesa
suitagainstBal l
egingthatBbor r
owedRs.400ont hef ootoft he
pronote.Badmi tsthatheexecutedthepronote:f r
om itthenat ural
presumpt i
onwouldar i
sethatBborrowedasum ofRs.400f r
om A.

Sect
ion4ofI
ndi
anEv
idenceactl
aysdown:
MayPr
esume-
Whenev eri
tisprovi
dedbythisActthatCour
tmaypresumeafact,i
tmay
ei
therregardsuchfactasproved,unl
essandunt
ili
tisdi
spr
oved,ormay
cal
lforproofofi
t.
Shal
lpr
esume-
Whenev eri
tsdi r
ectedbythi
sActthatt
heCourtshal
lpr
esumeaf
act
,it
shal
lregardsuchfactaspr
oved,
unl
essandunt
ili
tdi
spr
oved.
Concl
usi
vepr
oof
-
Whenonef actisdecl
aredbythisActtobeconclusiveproofofanother
,the
Courtshal
l
,onpr oofoftheonef act
,regardtheotheraspr oved,andshal
l
notall
owevidencetobegivenforthepurposeofdisprov
ingit.

6
Ki
ndsofpr
esumpt
ion
Pr
esumptions ar
e oft hr
ee ki
nds :(
1)Presumpti
on offactornat
ural
pr
esumption,
(2)Presumptionofl
aw(r
ebutt
abl
eandunrebutt
abl
e),
and(3)
Mixedpr
esumpt i
ons,orpr
esumpti
onoflawandfact
.

Pr
esumpt
ionoff
act
Presumpt i
onsoff actareinf
erenceswhicharenat urallydrawnfrom t he
observati
onofthecour seofnat ur
eandt heconstit
utionofhumanmi nd.
Theexampl esgivenabov earetheexampl esofthepr esumpti
onoff act.
Secti
on114oft heActandt heill
ustr
ati
onsunderthesect i
onareexampl es
ofpr esumpti
onoff act
s.Sect
ions86,87,88and90al sodealwit
ht he
presumptionoffact.Thesepr
esumpt i
onsaregeneral
lyrebut t
abl
e.
In,Ni
  l
akanthaPat ivSt ateofOr i
ssa1, 
inthiscase,t heaccusedmar ri
edthe
victi
mi nApr il1982andhasbeenbenef i
tedwi thadowr y .Butl at
erthe
accuseddesi redt opur chaseahouse,andoft hepur pose,heaskedt he
victi
m togetRs70, 00f rom herpar ents.Whenshecoul dnotgett he
amountshewast orturedandi n1986shedi ed.Theaccusedsuppor t
edhi s
arguments wi th properr easoni ng and l ogict hatthe cour tf ound the
presumptiont obeofr ebuttablenature.Ast hear gumentsadv ancedbyt he
accusedhav eenoughr el
ev ance,theaccusedwasacqui ttedofSect i
on
113A.TheHi ghCour tsai dt hattheypr esumpt ionexi t
edher ei srebuttabl
e
andsuchpr esumpt ioncanbeescal atedwhenev erthecircumst ancesof
thecasemat chtheessent ialsorthei nterpretationofthelegalpr ovi
sions.
Andher e,inthiscase,t heaccusedhasdi sprov edallthepr esumpt i
onsof
thecourthence, t
heaccusedwasr eleased.
I
n, MangalRam &AnorvSt at
eofMadhy aPr adesh2,
inthi
scase,thewifeof
theaccusedwasl i
vi
ngwithherparent
sf ormanyy earsandhasnov i
sit
ed
hermat r
imonialhomeforalongtime.Butwi t
hinonemont hofretur
ningto
hermat rimonialhome,she commi tted suicide.Thereforethe cour t
presumedt hecircumst
ancethattheaccusedi sresponsi
bleforthedeath
oftheladyandt hecasecomesunderSect i
on113BofI ndianEvi
denceAct .
Butt hehusbandandheri n-l
awspr ovedt hatt hedeathwasnotcaused
becauseoft hereasonssubj
ectedtocruelt
y .Thecour ti
nt hatmatt
ersaid
1
(1995Cr
iLJ2472)
2
1999Cri
LJ4342

7
thatt
hepr esumpt
ionwasofrebut
tabl
enatur
eandt hepr
esumpt
ioncan’
t
besustai
nedanymore,
hencet
heaccusedacquit
ted.

Pr
esumpt
ionofl
aw
Asmentioned abovethepresumpt
ionsofLaw ar
eoft wo ki
nds:(
1)
i
rr
ebut
tableorconcl
usi
ve,
(2)ther
ebutt
abl
epr
esumpti
onofl
aw.
1)Irr
ebuttable.-Theconcl usi
v eori rrebut tabl
epr esumpt ionsofl aw ar e
thoselegalr ul
eswhi charenotov ercomebyanyev idencet hatt he
fact is ot her wise. A wel l-
known i nstance of an i r
rebuttable
presumpt i
onofl aw canbef oundi nSect i
on82oft heI ndi
anPenal
Code,wher eini tislaiddownt hat" Not hingi sanof f
encewhi chi s
donebyachi ldundersev eny earsofage.Ther et herul esofest oppel
aretheot herexampl esoft hissortofpr esumpt i
on.Sect i
ons115, 116
and117oft heActdealwi t
ht heest oppel .Ther eissai dtobean
estoppelwher eapar t
yisnotal l
owedt osayt hatacer tainstatement
offactinnat urewhet heri
nr ealit
yi tistrueornot .Ifinacr iminal case
i
ti sprovedt hatt heaccusedi sbel owsev eny earsinageheshal lbe
presumedi nnocent ,noev idencewi llbeal l
owedt opr ovet hatt he
accusedwasgui l
ty.Whereamanhav i
ngnot itl
eobt ainspossessi on
oflandunderl easebyamani npossessi onwhoassumeshi mt ogi ve
at i
tl
easat enanthecannotdenyhi sl andlord'stit
le.Thusi ti sclear
thatthi
ski ndofpr esumptionofl awi sconcl usive.
2)Rebut t
abl e presumpt i
on. -This kind ofpr esumpt ion ar ises when
presumpt ionsofl aw ar ecer tai
nl egalr ules,def i
ningt heamountof
evidence r equisi
tet o suppor ta par t
icularal legation,whi ch facts
beingpr oved,maybeei therexpl ainedawayorr ebuttedbyev idence
tothecont rar
y,butareconcl usivei nabsenceofsuchev i
dence.Legal
presumpt ionsoft hiskindar edef i
niti
onsoft hequant i
tyofev idence
suffici
entt o make a pr i
ma f acie case :i n otherwor ds oft he
cir
cumst ancesunderwhi cht hebur denofpr oofl i
esont heopposi te
party.Af ewexampl eswi llsuffi
ce.Thusamani spr esumedi nnocent
untilhei spr ovedguilt
y;achi l
di fbor ni nal egalwedl ockshal lbe
presumedt obel egi
ti
mat eandonewhoquest i
onshi sl egiti
macy
mustdi sprov eit;i fa chi ldi sbor n dur i
ng di vorce he mustbe
presumed i ll
egit
imate unl ess the cont r
aryi s pr ov ed ;agai nt he

8
 presumptionoflaw ist hatamani sali
veunlessnothinghasbeen
heardabouthimf or7y earswhenthepresumpti
onisthatheisdead.
Sections107,108,112ar etheexamplesofthispresumpti
on.The
dist
incti
onbetweenpr esumpt i
onoffactandPresumptionofLaw is
thattheformeri
sdiscretionar
ywhil
ethelatt
eri
smandat or
y.
Ther
earebroadl
ythreei
mpor
tantpr
ovi
sionsr
egar
dingt
hepr
esumpt
ioni
n
matr
imoni
aloff
enceswhi
char
e:

 Presumptionast
oabet
mentofsui
cidebyamarr
iedwomanwit
hin
seveny earsofmar
ri
agecover
edunderSect
ion113A ofI
ndian
EvidenceAct.

 Presumpti
onast odowrydeat
hwi t
hinsevenyearsofmar
ri
age
coveredunderSect
ion113BofI
ndi
anEvidenceAct
.

 Bir
thdur
ingthemar ri
ageistheconcl
usi
vepr oofofl
egi
ti
macy
cover
edunderSect
ion112oft
heIndi
anEvi
denceAct.
In,Shant
  iv.StateofHar yana3,thein-
lawsoft hebr i
dedidnotal l
owhert o
visi
thermat ernalhouset omeetherpar ents,andwhent hebr i
de’sparents
came t o meethert hey wer e notper mitt
ed t o entert he house and
compl ai
ned tot hem aboutt he amountofdowr ythatt he demand of
scooter& TV wasnotf ulfi
ll
ed.Soonaf terthei ncident,thewi f
eoft he
accused suffered an unnatur aldeath.TheSupr emeCour tall
owed t he
presumpt i
onst atedunderSect i
on113B ofI ndianEv idenceActast he
deathwascausedwi thinsev eny ear
sofmar riageandt hattoojustafter
suchincidentprohibit
edundert hi
sAct ,andont hebasisofappl i
cati
onsof
thisSecti
ononeoft hein-
lawswasconv i
ctedforcausi ngdowr ydeath.

I St
n  ateofM. P.v.Sk.Lal l
u4,anewl yweddedwi fewasf aci
ngsev ere
beati
ngr egul
arlybyherin-
lawsfrom thever
yfir
stdayofhermar r
iage,and
atlast,sheendsupdy i
ngwi th100%ofbur ni
njur
ies.TheCourtexecuted
theappl i
cati
onofpr esumptionstatedunderSecti
on 113A 
andexplained
thatsuchpresumpt i
oncanbei nvokedtopuni
shtheaccused.

3
1991AI
R1226
4
1990Cr
i.L.
J.129

9
Mi
xedpr
esumpt
ions
Mixedpr esumpt ionsofl awandf actar echiefl
yconf i
nedt ot heEnglishl aw
ofr ealpropertysoi tisnotnecessar yt opr esumesubj ecthere.TheI ndian
EvidenceActhasmadepr ovisionsf ort hepr esumpt i
onsoff actandt he
presumpt ionsofl aw.I ncer t
ai nsect i
onsoft heEv idenceActi thasbeen
prov i
ded t hat"the cour tmay pr esume"cer t
ainf acts.In some ot her
sect i
onst hewor ds" t
hecour tshal lpr esumeaf act
"hasbeenused.Ther e
arecer t
ainsect i
onsi nwhi chitissai dthatacer t
ainfactisconcl usi
vepr oof
ofacer tainanot herf act.Sect i
on4oft heEv idenceActcont r
olst hese
sect i
onsandgi v
esadi recti
ont ocour tsast ohowt opr oceedundert hose
sect i
onsoft heEv i
denceAct .

10
Maypr
esume
Wel litisprov idedt hatt hecour tmaypr esumeaf act,thecour tmayt ake
noticeoft hef actwi thoutcal li
ngf oritspr ooformaycal luponapar tyto
prov ethatf act.Her et hecour thasdi scretiont opresumeaf actornott o
presumei t
.Gener all
ywhenadocumenti sf il
edi nacasei ti stobepr oved
byadduci ngev i
denceast owhowr ot
et hedeedandwhosi gnedi t
.Unless
and unt iliti s done,t he documentcannotbe r ead in ev idence.Ifa
documentpr oducedbef oret hecour ti st hirt
yy earsol d,t hecour tunder
Sect i
on90maydi spensewi ththepr oofofi tandr eadt hedocumenti n
evidencewi thoutcal li
ngf ort heproofofi t
.Thecour tmayal socallforthe
proofofi tandmayor dert hatt hedocumentwi l
lnotber eadi nev i
dence
withoutbei ngpr oved,Sect ion88oft heEv idenceActl aysdownt hatwhen
at elegram hasbeenr eceiv edthecour tmaypr esumet hatt hemessage
forwar dedf rom aTel egr aphOf fi
cet oaper soni st hesamewhi chwas
deliveredfort ransmi ssionatt heof fi
cef r
om whi chthemessagewassent .
I
ll
ust
rat
ions-

 Everynegoti
abl
einstr
umentispr
esumedt
hati
tisdr
awnf
ort
he
purposeofgoodconsi
der
ati
on.

 Thereshal
lbecontinui
tyoft hingsunl
essprovencont r
aryli
keifa
propert
yisconsidered t
o bean ancest r
alpr opert
y,itshallbe
presumedthati
tissountilitisprov
encontr
arytot hepresumpti
on
(Chit
oMahtoovLilaMahto)5
.

  
Ifaper sonrefusest
oansweraquestion,whichi
snotcompell
ed
bythelawt oanswer,
thecour
tmaypresumet hati
fheanswer
sthe
quest
iont hent
heanswerwouldbeunfavourabl
etohi
m.

  
Thatifamanpossessessomest ol
engoodssoonaft
erthetheft
thenitisbeli
evedthatheiseit
herthethi
eforhasrecei
vedthe
goodsknowingt henat
ureoft
hegoodsunlesshecanaccountfor
hispossessi
on.

5
AI
R1991Pat186

11
Shal
lPr
esume
Whenev ert herei sapr ovisiont otheef fect"t
hatt hecour tshallpr esumea
fact"thecour tcannotexer ciseitsdiscr et
ion.Itiscompel l
edt ot aket he
factaspr oved,i.e.,i
tshal lhav etopr esumet hef act.Buti nt hiscaset he
courtwi l
lbeatl i
bertytoal l
ow theopposi t
epar tyt oadduceev i
dencet o
disprovet hef actsopr esumedandi ft heopposi tepar tyissuccessf ulin
disprovi
ngi t,thecour tshal lnotpr esumet hef act.Int heI ndianEv idence
Actt he wor ds " shal
lpr esume"i ndicatet hatpr esumpt ion t her eini s
unrebuttable.Sect ion89oft heEv idenceActpr ovides" thatthecour tshall
presumet hatev erydocument ,cal
ledf orandnotpr oducedaf ternot icet o
produce, att
est ed,stampedandexecut edi nthemannerr equiredbyl aw. "

Expr
essi
ons"
shal
l"and"
may
"expl
ained
Accor dingtoSect i
on4wher evert heexpr ession" maypr esume"hasbeen
usedi nt heAct ,adiscret
ionhasbeengi v
entot heCourttopr esumeaf act
orr efusetor aisesuchapr esumpt ion.IftheCour tf
indsthatitisaf itcase
forr aisi
ngpr esumpt i
on,inthatev ent ,suchfact sstandpr ovedunl essand
untilitisdispr ovedbyt heot hersi de.Accor dingt othi
ssect ion,incases
wher eadi scret i
onli
eswi ththeCour tanditrefusest oexercisediscr eti
on,
theni tmaycal lupont hepar t
iest opr ovethef actbyleadingev i
dence.I n
thosesect i
onswher etheexpr essionhasbeenusedt hattheCour t" shal
l
presume" ,
int hateventnodiscr et
ionhasbeenl eftwiththeCour tandt here
i
sl egislati
vecommandt oittor ai
seapr esumpt i
onandr egardsuchf actas
prov edunlessandunt i
litisdisprov ed.Insuchanev entual
ity
,thequest ion
ofcal li
ngupont heparti
estof ormal lyprovedocumentdoesnotar ise.

Pr
esumpt
ionandpr
oofdi
sti
ngui
shed
Proofconsideredast heestabli
shmentofmat er
ialf
act
si neachparti
cul
ar
casebypr operandl egalmeanst ot
hesati
sfacti
onofthecourtiseff
ected
by(a)evidenceorst atementoffact
,admissionorconfessi
onofthepar t
y
asalsopr oductionoft hedocument;(b)presumpti
on;( c)j
udi
cialnoti
ce
andinspecti
on, etc.

12
Everyfactonwhi chjudi
cial j
udgmentmaybegi venmustbepr oved.Butt he
LawofEv i
dencehaspr ovidedt hatcourtcant akeintoconsi derat
ioncer tai
n
factswi t
houtcall
ingforpr oofoft hem,i.
e.,thecour tmaypr esumecer tai
n
thi
ngs.Thewor dpresumpt ionmeansat hingt akenf orgranted.Int heLaw
ofEv idencethewor d"presumpt ion"isusedt odesi gnateani nference,
affi
rmat i
veornegativeoft heexistenceofcer tainfactsdr awnbyaj udi
cial
tri
bunal.Thusproofisthef inalstageinapr oceedingwhi chisarrivedatby
evidenceorpr esumpt i
on.Pr esumpt i
oni soneoft hemeansofef fecti
ng
proof.

Concl
usi
vePr
oof
Whenev eri
tismentionedthataf actisa" concl
usi
veproof"ofanotherfact
,
thecourthasnodi scret
ionatall.Itcannotcalluponapar t
yt oprovethat
factnorcanital
lowtheopposi t
epar tytoadduceevidencetodispr
ovet f
act
.
Secti
on41oft heEv i
denceActpr ovidesinteral
iathataf i
naljudgment,
orderordecreeofacompet entcour tinexerci
seofmat r
imonialj
uri
sdict
ion
i
saconcl usi
veproofofthatlegalchar act
er.
Forexampl e,supposeAf i
lesasuitinacour toflawf ordeclarat
ionthatBi s
hislegall
ymar ri
edwi fe.Thecour tgiv esadecr eei nfavourofA and
declar
est hatBi shi swi fe.Afterafew y earsi nt heli
feti
meofA,Bf il
esa
suitagai
nstDf orthepr oper t
yofoneC,al legingt hatsheiswi dowofC.I n
thi
scaset herewi l
lbeani ssuewhet herBi st hewi feofC.Df i
l
est hecopy
ofthejudgmentoft hepr ev i
ouscase( Av ersusB) .Thisjudgmentwi l
lprove
thatBislegallymar ri
edwi feofA.Nowt hatBi slegall
ymar ri
edwif eofAi s
aconclusivepr oofoft hef actthatsheisnott hewi feofC.Ther efore,aft
er
thejudgmentment ionedabov ehasbeenf iled,thecour tcannotal l
owBt o
adduceev idencetopr ov ethatsheiswi feofCandnotofA.
"Conclusiveproof"i
nSect i
on4oft heEv i
denceActshowst hatbydeclari
ng
certai
nfactt obeconclusiveproofofanotheranarti
fi
cial
pr obati
veeffectis
givenbyt helawt ocert
ainfactsandnoev idenceisall
owedt obepr oduced
withav iewt ocombat i
ngt hateff
ect.Thesecasesgener all
yoccurwheni t
i
sagai nstthepol i
cyofGov ernmentorthei nt
erestofsocietythatamat ter
maybef urtheropentodispute.
"

13
 Concl
usi
on

In Tukaram vSt at eofMahar ashtr

a6,Thiscasewasdeci dedonconsi dering
thef actsofMat huraRapeCaseandwhi l
eadj udicat
ingt hecaset heCour t
j
ust if
iedtheneedandnecessi ti
esofsuchpr esumpt ions.TheCour tal so
explainedt hatPr esumptionshasawi derscopeast heydon’ tonl
yhelpt he
victi
mi nthef astt r
ialbuti tal
sohel psi ngi vingdirectiont othecase.
Ther efor
esuchpr esumpt i
oncanef fectivelyhelpt hej udiciar
yinproviding
quick and compl et
ej ustice to the soci ety.Accor ding to Stephen
presumpt ion is mandat ory,notper mi ssive pr esumpt i
on and especi all
y
per missi
vei s deal tin Sect i
on 90 of t he ev i
dence act .Permissive
presumpt ionmeansi tisont hecourtdiscr et
ionwhet hertobel i
eveornott o
believe.

6
19792SCC143

14
 BI
BLI
OGRAPHY

BOOKS:
1.BatukLal
,TheLawofEv
i 23rdEd.Repr
dence, int2020,
Centr
alLawAgency

STATUTES:
1.CodeofCriminalPr
ocedure,
1973
2.TheIndi
anEvidenceAct,
1872
3.I
ndianPenalCode,1860

WEBLI
OGRAPHY:
1.ht
tps:
//www. legalbit
es.in/
2.ht
tps:
//i
ndianjudiciar
ynot es.
com/
3.ht
tps:
//l
awt eacher.net/
4.ht
tps:
//bl
og. i
pleaders.i
n/
5.ht
tps:
//i
ndiankanoon. org/
6.ht
tps:
//www. scconl i
ne.com/

15