‘A’ is charged with travelling on a train without a ticket. As per the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, who among the following has to prove that he had a ticket?
[amp_mcq option1=”‘A’ has to prove it” option2=”Guilt is always to be proved by the prosecution” option3=”The Court will decide it” option4=”It is proved the moment ‘A’ is caught without ticket” correct=”option1″]
This question was previously asked in
UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2018
Under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, the general rule is that the burden of proof lies on the person who asserts a fact. However, Section 106 of the Act provides an important exception: “When any fact is especially within the knowledge of any person, the burden of proving that fact is upon him.” Whether a person has a ticket for travelling on a train is a fact that is specifically within their personal knowledge. Therefore, if charged with travelling without a ticket, the burden of proving that they did possess a ticket rests upon the accused (‘A’ in this case).