PLEA OF ALIBI-

SEC11
Unit – 2
LAW OF EVIDENCE
WHEN FACTS NOT OTHERWISE
RELEVANT BECOME 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.
 SCOPE
 It is only a rule of evidence recognized in Section 11
of the Evidence Act that facts which are inconsistent
with the fact in issue are relevant. The section is
described as “residuary section” dealing with
relevancy of facts which are logically admissible.

 Example:
A has written a defamatory statement against B.
This is a fact.
A is illiterate, this is another fact. Both the facts are
inconsistent but both facts are relevant and
admissible.
FACTS INCONSISTENT WITH FACT IN ISSUE
OR RELEVANT FACT
 One fact is inconsistent with the other when it cannot co-
exist with the other. Under this clause facts are relevant
only because they cannot co-exist with fact in issue or
relevant fact.

 Refer to previous ex; The usual theory of essential

inconsistency is that a certain fact cannot co-exist with
the doing of the act in question, and, therefore, that if
that fact is true of a person of whom the fact is alleged, it
is impossible that he should have done the act.”
SIX CLASSES OF CASES WHICH SHOW
INCONSISTENCY
(a) Alibi
Alibi is a Latin word, which means
elsewhere. It is used when the accused
takes the plea that when the occurrence
took place he was elsewhere. In such a
situation the prosecution has to discharge
the burden satisfactorily.
 An alibi is not an exception envisaged in the
IPC or any other law. It is a rule of evidence
recognized by Section 11 of the Evidence
Act that facts inconsistent with fact in issue
are relevant [Illustration (a)]

 However, it cannot be the sole link or sole

circumstance to bare conviction.

 When the accused took the plea of alibi the

burden of proof lies on him under section 103
of this Act.
 The plea of alibi has to be taken at the
earliest opportunity and it has to be proved
to the satisfaction of the court.

 Binay Kumar Singh v. State of Bihar, (1997) 1

SCC 283 in the following words:
“We must bear in mind that an alibi is not an
exception (special or general) envisaged in the
Indian Penal Code or any other law. It is only a
rule of evidence recognised in Section 11 of the
Evidence Act that facts which are inconsistent
with the fact in issue are relevant.”
b) Non access of husband to show illegitimacy of
the child:
 Since legitimacy of the child implies a
cohabitation between husband and wife. For
disproving the legitimacy, the husband has to
prove that he had no cohabitation with his wife
during the probable time of begetting as he was
in abroad.

(c) Survival of the alleged deceased:

 A is accused of murdering В on 10th August 1996
at Delhi. But A tried to prove and led evidence to
show that В was alive on 25th December 2004.
Both the facts are relevant under section 11 only
because these are not consisting with each other.
(d) Commission of an offence by a third person:
A is charged with the murder of B. A leads
evidence that В was murdered by C. This is
admissible being inconsistent with fact in issue.
(e) Self-infliction of harm:
A is charged with the murder of B. A proves that
В had committed suicide. The evidence is
admissible.
(f) Non-execution of document:
A files a suit for recovery of possession against В
alleging that he has purchased the land. В leads
evidence that the deed of sale was not
executed as yet. The fact is relevant.
FACTS HIGHLY PROBABLE AND
IMPROBABLE
 Under the second clause the fact which by itself
or in combination with other facts make the
existence and non­existence of the fact in issue
or relevant fact highly probable or improbable.

 It also indicates that the connection between

the facts in issue and the collateral facts sought
to be proved must be immediate as to render
the co-existence of the two highly probable.
The collateral facts can be admitted in
evidence if they make the existence of the fact
in issue highly probable or improbable.
 EX; When a person is charged with forging a particular
document, evidence is afforded to prove that a number of
documents apparently forged or held in readiness for the
purpose of forgery were found in possession of the accused.

 It can be said as per Reg. v Prabhudas that in a charge of

forgery, the evidence offered to prove that a number of
documents apparently forged or held in readiness for the
purpose of forgery found in possession of the accused is not
admissible. This section renders inadmissible the evidence
of one crime to prove the existence of another unconnected
crime, even though it is cogent.
 Explaining the essence of a plea of alibi, it was observed
in 1981) 2 SCC 166 that. Dudh Nath Pandey v. State of
U.P.,
 Facts –
A college-going boy called Vijay Bhan Kishore was shot dead on the
morning of November 2, 1976 near the Hathi Park, Dayanand Marg,
Allahabad. The appellant was convicted for that offence under Section 302
of the Penal Code by the learned Third Additional Sessions Judge,
Allahabad and was sentenced to death. The order of conviction and
sentence having been confirmed by the High Court of Allahabad by its
judgment dated August 23, 1978, the appellant has filed this appeal by
Special Leave.
 “The plea of alibi postulates the physical
impossibility of the presence of the accused at the
scene of offence by reason of his presence at
another place. The plea can therefore succeed
only if it is shown that the accused was so far away
at the relevant time that he could not be present
at the place where the crime was committed.”