IPC Section 114
IPC Section 114 – Court may presume existence of certain facts
Text of Section 114 (simplified explanation):
“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.”
Detailed Explanation
Nature of Section 114:
This is a presumption clause in the Indian Penal Code.
It does not automatically declare a fact to exist, but allows the court to presume a fact based on logical reasoning and common experience.
Key Principle:
The law recognizes that some facts, though not directly proved by evidence, are so likely to happen that the court can assume them.
Example: If a person is found with recently stolen goods, it is reasonable for a court to presume that the person knew the goods were stolen unless evidence proves otherwise.
Factors the Court Considers:
Natural Events: Things that happen according to the laws of nature.
Example: Heavy rain causes flooding. If a river is flooded, the court may presume it rained recently.
Human Conduct: Usual behavior of people in society.
Example: If a person leaves home suddenly and disappears with valuables, it is likely they intended to commit theft or fraud.
Public or Private Business: Actions commonly done in day-to-day life.
Example: If an employee has access to office funds and money is missing, the court may presume misappropriation unless proven otherwise.
Purpose of Section 114:
Helps courts draw logical inferences when direct evidence is missing.
Makes judicial process practical, avoiding unreasonable insistence on proof of obvious facts.
Important Points:
Presumption is not conclusive: It is rebuttable if contrary evidence is presented.
The court uses common sense and reasoning, not just legal technicalities.
Section 114 is often applied in criminal cases, but it can be used in civil cases too.
Example in Daily Life:
A man is seen running away from a shop with a bag.
Even if no one directly saw him steal, the court may presume he stole the items, considering natural human conduct.
A person is found with a large amount of cash in a house that was robbed.
The court may presume the person was involved in the robbery unless he provides a reasonable explanation.
✅ In short:
IPC Section 114 allows the court to logically assume facts that naturally follow from the circumstances, even if they are not directly proved, based on common experience and human behavior. These are presumptions, not absolutes, and can be challenged by contrary evidence.
RELATED Blog
0 comments