Section 113B of Evidence Act "Presumption as to dowry death"
When the question is whether a person has committed the dowry death of a woman and it is shown that soon before her death such woman had been subjected by such person to cruelty or harassment for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry, the Court shall presume that such person had caused the dowry death.
Explanation.- For the
purposes of this section, "dowry death" shall have the
same meaning as in section 304B of the Indian Penal
Code(45 of 1860).]
Section 114 of Evidence Act "Court may presume existence of certain acts"
The court may presume the existence of any fact which it
thinks likely to have happened, regard being had to the
common course of natural events, human conduct and public
and private business, in their relation to the facts of the
particular case.
Illustrations
The Court may presume -
(a) That a man who is in possession of stolen goods soon
after the theft is either the thief or has received the
goods knowing them to be stolen, unless he can accounts for
his possession.
(b) That an accomplice is unworthy of credit, unless he is
corroborated in material particulars;
(c) That a bill of exchange, accepted or endorsed, was
accepted or endorsed for good consideration.
(d) That a thing or state of things which has been shown to
be in existence within a period shorter than that within
which such things or states of things usually cease to
exist, is still in existence;
(e) That judicial and official acts have been regularly
performed;
(f) That the common course of business has been followed in
particular cases;
(g) That evidence which could be and is not produced would,
if produced, be unfavorable to the person withholds it.
(h) That if a man refuses to answer a question which he is
not compelled to answer by law, the answer, if given would
be unfavorable to him;
(i) That when a document creating and obligation is in the
hands of the obligor, the obligation has been discharged.
But the Court shall also have regard to such facts as the
following, in considering whether such maxims do or do not
apply to the particular case before it:-
As to illustration (a) -A shop- keeper has in his till a
marked rupee soon after it was stolen, and cannot account
for its possession specifically, but is continually
receiving rupees in the course of his business;
As to illustration (b)-A person of the highest character is
tried for causing a man's death by an act of negligence in
arranging certain machinery. B, person of equally goods
character, who also took part in the took part in the
arrangement, describes precisely what was done, and admits
and explains the common carelessness of A and himself;
As to illustration (b)-A person of the highest character is
tried for causing a man's death by an act of negligence in
arranging certain machinery B, person of equality goods
character, who also took part in the arrangement, describes
precisely what was done, and admits and explains the common
carelessness of A and himself;
As to illustration (b)-A crime is committed by several
persons. A, B and C, three of the criminals, are captured on
the spot and kept apart from each other. Each gives an
account of the crime implicating D, and the accounts
corroborate each other in such a manner as to render
previous concert highly improbable;
As to illustration (c) - A, the drawer of a bill of
exchange, was a man of business. B, the acceptor, was young
and ignorant person, completely under A's influence;
As to illustration (d) - It is proved that a river ran in a
certain course five years ago, but it is known that there
have been floods since that time which might change its
course.
As to illustration (e) - A judicial Act, the regularity of
which is in question, was performed under exceptional
circumstances;
As to illustration (f) - The question is, whether a letter
was received, it is shown to have been posted, but the usual
course of the post was interrupted by disturbances;
As to illustration (g) - A man refuses to produce a document
which would bear on a contract of small importance on which
he is sued, but which might also injure the feeling and
reputation of his family;
As to illustration (h) - A man refuses to answer a question
which he is not compelled by law to answer, but the answer
to it might cause loss to him in matters unconnected with
the matter in relation to which it is asked;
As to illustration (i) - A bond is in possession of the
obligor, but the circumstances of the case are such that he
may have stolen it.