Private: Evidence Law Content
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.