Section 107: Burden of Proving Death of Person Known to Have Been Alive

Overview

Section 107 of the Bhartiya Sakshya Bill, 2023, establishes a rule about who needs to *prove* whether someone is dead, especially if there’s evidence they were alive relatively recently. Essentially, if someone was known to be alive within the last thirty years, the person claiming they are now dead has to provide evidence to support that claim. It doesn’t automatically mean the person *is* dead, just that the responsibility to prove it lies with the claimant.

Key Principles / Ingredients

• Type of Evidence: This section deals with all types of evidence – oral testimony (what witnesses say), documentary evidence (letters, records), and even electronic records. It’s about the *burden* of presenting that evidence, not the type itself.
• Conditions for Relevancy: The section is relevant only when the central question is whether a person is alive or dead. It’s triggered when someone asserts a person is deceased.
• Burden of Proof Implications: This is the core of the section. Normally, the person making a claim has to prove it. Section 107 shifts this burden. If it’s shown the person was alive within 30 years, the burden shifts to the person *claiming* they are now dead to prove it. This is a specific exception to the general rule.

How Courts Use this Provision

Judges use this section to determine who needs to present evidence in cases where a person’s life or death is in question. For example, in insurance claims, inheritance disputes, or cases involving missing persons. The court will first establish if there’s evidence the person was alive within the 30-year timeframe. If so, the claimant must then present evidence – like a death certificate, credible witness testimony of the death, or a long period of unexplained absence – to convince the court the person is deceased.

Illustrations and Examples

• Example 1 – Simple Situation: Mr. Sharma disappeared 2 years ago. His wife claims he is dead to receive his insurance money. Because he was last seen alive within the 30-year period, the wife must provide evidence of his death (e.g., a death certificate, or witness testimony of his death).
• Example 2 – More Complex Situation: Mr. Verma left India 25 years ago to work abroad. His family hasn’t heard from him since. His son now wants to sell his father’s property, claiming he is presumed dead. Because Mr. Verma was alive within 30 years of the claim, the son must present evidence beyond just the lack of contact to prove his father’s death. Simply stating he hasn’t been heard from isn’t enough.

Important Provisos / Explanations

The Bhartiya Sakshya Bill, 2023, does not include any specific provisos or explanations attached to Section 107. The section operates on its straightforward principle: recent life creates a burden on those claiming death.

Difference from Old Evidence Act (if applicable)

This section largely mirrors the provision in the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (Section 108). There are no significant shifts in the underlying principle or application under the new Bill.

Key Takeaways

• If someone was alive within 30 years, the person claiming they are dead must prove it.
• This applies to all types of evidence – oral, documentary, and electronic.
• The section focuses on *who* has the responsibility to prove the fact of death, not on whether death is ultimately established.
• It’s a specific exception to the general rule that the person making a claim must prove it.