For Free Online Demo Classes of LLB (English and Hindi) by Asstt. Prof. Rekha Khandelwal,
fill the google form, click here https://forms.gle/mSi4VsEwUMhHwBnA6
Section 11 of IEA
Section -11 When facts not otherwise relevant become relevant.––
Plea of Alibi
Facts not otherwise relevant are relevant ––
- if they are inconsistent with any fact in issue or relevant fact;
- if by themselves or in connection with other facts they make the existence or non-existence of any fact in issue or relevant fact highly probable or improbable.
- The question is, whether A committed a crime at Calcutta on a certain day.
The fact that, on that day, A was at Lahore is relevant.
The fact that, near the time when the crime was committed, A was at a distance from the place where it was committed, which would render it highly improbable, though not impossible, that he committed it, is relevant.
- The question is, whether A committed a crime.
The circumstances are such that the crime must have been committed either by A, B, C or D. Every fact which shows that the crime could have been committed by no one else, and that it was not committed by either B, C or D, is relevant.
State of Maharashtra v. Narsingrao,AIR 1984 SC 63,67
Theory of Alibi
‘Inconsistent with any fact in issue’.— The Supreme Court has Observed that it is well settled that the plea of alibi must be proved with absolute certainty so as to completely exclude the possibility of the presence of the person concerned at the place of occurrence. In this case the police officer contended that he was not present at the station where bribe was supposed to have been offered to him. But he showed his presence Inat such places as were within reach, being a few miles only. The plea was not allowe
‘Highly probable or improbable’
Bhuriya v. Ram Kali,AIR 1971Punj 9
Only such facts are made admissible by these words as would carry great weight with the Cour in reaching a conclusion with regard to existence or non-existence of a fact in issue or relevant fact. It is not mere reasonable probability but a high degree thereof that is envisaged.
Tepu Khan v. Rajani Mohun Das (1898)
In a case where the previous suit was to recover a two-thirds share of the property in question, and the subsequent suit was by a different plaintiff to recover the remainin one-third share of the same property, it was held in the subsequent suit that the judgmen in the previous suit was not admissible in evidence, the subject-matter in the two suits n being identical.
Mahendra Singh Dhaiya v. State(CBI) 2003 CrLJ 1908
In this case husband charged with killing his wife, her letters to him were not taken to be relevant under this section as they did not indicate any probability.
- Alibi – Absence of accused from place of occurrence of offence with which he has been charged.
Berden of proof – on accused
Presence of accused at meserable distance from place of occurrence necessary to prove alibi
Alibi of co –accused
Failure to prove alibi does not mean accused was at place of occurrence
Prosecution has toshow positive evidence for the same
- Self – infliction of harm
- Survival- After presumption of death ( Sec. 108)
- Non – Access of husband to show illegitimacy of child ( Sec. 112)
- Commission of offence by 3rd person
- Section -11 IEA