May Presume Shall presume and Conclusive proof – Section 4 of Indian Evidence Act

Section 4 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 deals with May Presume Shall presume and Conclusive proof .

May presume

When it is provided by the Act that the 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.

This means that the Court has the discretion to either accept a fact as true without any further proof, or to demand proof of the fact before accepting it as true.

Shall presume

When it is directed by the Act that the Court shall presume a fact, it shall regard such fact as proved, unless and until it is disproved.

This means that the Court is required to accept a fact as true unless the party opposing the presumption can prove that the fact is not true.

Conclusive proof

When one fact is declared by the 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 disproving it.

This means that once one fact is proven, the Court is required to accept another fact as proven, and the party opposing the presumption cannot give evidence to prove that the second fact is not true.

Examples May Presume Shall presume and Conclusive proof 

  • May presume: The Court may presume that a letter properly addressed and stamped was duly received in the course of post.
  • Shall presume: The Court shall presume that a child under seven years of age is incapable of giving intelligent testimony.
  • Conclusive proof: A confession made by a person in the custody of a police officer is conclusive proof against him.

Significance of May Presume, Shall presume and Conclusive proof

Presumptions and conclusive proof are important concepts in the law of evidence because they can help to simplify the trial process and to ensure that justice is served. By presuming certain facts to be true, the Court can avoid having to waste time and resources proving those facts. Additionally, conclusive proof can help to prevent criminals from escaping justice by lying about certain facts.

Notes for Judicial Exam

  • It is important to be familiar with the different types of presumptions and conclusive proof that exist under the Evidence Act.
  • When applying a presumption to a case, the Court must first decide whether the presumption is applicable. If the presumption is applicable, the Court must then decide whether the party opposing the presumption has been able to disprove the presumed fact.
  • Conclusive proof is the strongest type of evidence, and it cannot be disproven. If a party has proven a fact that is conclusively proved by the Evidence Act, the Court must accept that fact as true.

Following are some case laws on section 4 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, which deals with May Presume Shall presume and Conclusive proof :

Case 1: Shyam Sunder v. State of Punjab (1955) 1 SCR 229

In this case, the Supreme Court held that the presumption under section 114 of the Evidence Act, that a child under seven years of age is incapable of giving intelligent testimony, is a rebuttable presumption. This means that the prosecution can lead evidence to show that the child is capable of giving intelligent testimony, and in such a case, the Court can disregard the presumption and allow the child to testify.

Case 2: State of U.P. v. M.P. Sharma (1957) SCR 518

In this case, the Supreme Court held that the confession made by a person in the custody of a police officer is conclusive proof against him, unless it is shown that the confession was made under duress or inducement. This means that once the prosecution has proven that the accused made a confession in the custody of a police officer, the Court must accept that confession as true, unless the accused can prove that the confession was not made voluntarily.

Case 3: State of West Bengal v. Anukul Chandra Pramanik (1993) 2 SCC 403

In this case, the Supreme Court held that the High Court has the power to transfer a case from one court to another court, even if the presumption under section 114 of the Evidence Act is applicable. The Court held that the power to transfer cases is inherent in the High Court’s power to supervise and control the subordinate courts.

These are just a few examples of case laws on section 4 of the Evidence Act. There are many other case laws that deal with various aspects of presumptions and conclusive proof. It is important for lawyers and judges to be familiar with these case laws so that they can apply them correctly in their cases. May Presume Shall presume and Conclusive proof 

Leave a Comment