Application of Plea of Alibi

Plea of Alibi known as adverse burden of proof. Generally  Courts are not accept plea of alibi  easily. If the defendant failed to produce the evidence which would prove that he/she  was not  at the place  where  the offence was committed  but rather  was elsewhere, it can be seen that the Supreme Court of Nepal  has not considered  the claim of plea of alibi. In such condition  where the claim  of plea of alibi  is not proved  then the confession  made before the police , as in the case  of HMG. vs.Ali kha Mushalman and the witness testimony , as in the case of  Yogya Narayan  vs. Badrinath  Khanal has been taken as evidence  to convict  the accused.As established  principle in the case of R.vs.Johnson(1995) that the evidence  which  proves  no more  than  that  the accused  was not present   at the place where the offence is committed is not sufficient  but affirmative  evidence  of presence  at some other particular place is  required. On this ground in the case of Padam Bahadur vs.Dambar Singh Magar, the accused Dambar Singh presented the evidence  that he was  at Nwakot  District Court  at the time  when the alleged offence  was committed. In case of HMG.vs.Dukhi Mahato  Koiri and others, the accused was able to prove that he was admitted  in the hospital  while  the alleged offence  was committed and similarly  in the case of Gopal Prasad Prajuli and others vs.HMG,one of the accused was acquitted upon the testimony  of the witnesses  that he was  at their house  at the time  of inicident.In these cases the accused  were acquitted irrespective  of the evidences like witness testimony and Sarjamin report(spot investigation) against them.