Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 · Chapter VII: Of the Burden of Proof
Section 106: Burden of proof as to particular fact
In plain words
The burden of proving a particular fact lies on the person who wants the court to believe it, unless a law puts that burden on a particular person.
Example: A prosecutes B for theft and says B admitted it to C, so A must prove the admission. B says he was elsewhere at the time, so B must prove that.
A simplified explanation, prepared with AI assistance from the official text below and checked automatically against it for numbers and cross-references. The official text is the law and prevails over this summary. Not legal advice.
Read the in-depth explanation, with key Supreme Court rulings ↓
Official text
The burden of proof as to any particular fact lies on that person who wishes the Court to believe in its existence, unless it is provided by any law that the proof of that fact shall lie on any particular person.
Illustration
A prosecutes B for theft, and wishes the Court to believe that B admitted the theft to C. A must prove the admission. B wishes the Court to believe that, at the time in question, he was elsewhere. He must prove it.
Corresponding sections were matched by comparing the wording of both official texts, and for the IPC and BNS, also against a published correspondence table. Wording, punishments and structure often changed, so read both sections before relying on the match.
Source: India Code (indiacode.gov.in), the consolidated text published by the Legislative Department, Government of India. Text as updated on India Code on 25 August 2026. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here. Official text on India Code.
Understanding this section
Section 106 carries forward section 103 of the Indian Evidence Act: the burden of proving a particular fact lies on the person who wants the court to believe it, unless a law says otherwise.
Particular facts
An accused who sets up an alibi must lead evidence of it; a party alleging fraud must prove it.
Key Supreme Court rulings
Mahakali Sujatha v. The Branch Manager, Future Generali 2024 INSC 296
Decided under the Evidence Act. The provision enlarges the general rule, placing the burden of a particular fact on the person who wishes the court to believe it.
Read with: Section 104 BSA, Section 103 Evidence Act
Prepared with AI assistance as a study aid. Every ruling listed was checked against the Supreme Court's own judgments on this site, and quoted words appear in those judgments; linked names open the full judgment. Read the judgments themselves before relying on them. Not legal advice.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 106
No Supreme Court judgment in our database cites this section yet.