Burden of Proof for prosecution
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 06 April 2011
This query is : Resolved
My husband is currently on trial for a murder case in Trivandrum, Kerala. The incident in question occurred nearly six years ago, before we had met and married. My husband has been going to court and paying an advocate for all of those six years. He is doing everything he can to clear his name.
My husband did NOT do this crime, and there is NO evidence against him other than the testimony of the arresting officer. The arresting officer is the same man who my husband had filed a formal complaint against one week prior to this arrest. The officer has since been promoted, and any admission on his part that he falsely arrested my husband would surely destroy his career. He has no motivation to recant and admit that he is lying.
Although there is no other evidence, and although we have filed the as evidence the papers of formal complaint against the officer, there is still a very real chance that they will convict my husband based on the testimony of this officer. How can we have this officers 'evidence' stricken or not allowed for this trial, based on his proven reasons for prejudice against my husband? Does the prosecution have the burden of actual physical proof, or is this skewed testimony enough?
In short, how do we prove my husband is innocent against the word of a corrupt officer???
prashant pundhir
(Expert) 06 April 2011
No one can be convicted just on behalf of the testimony of a police officer . If that person remained a part of the investigation , surely he will be called for his evidence. Also any police person or officer who remained a part of the investigation,will not putted as a hostile witness .Anyway,at the time of his evidence,you will get the chance to cross examine that witness .There,with lot claverly and carefully,you can ask for about that complaint which your husband did and prove the malafied intention of that officer for which he is falsly implicating your husband in the offence .Your lawyer(specialist in criminal)knows better that how to bring out the thing favouring your husband .
One thing more that before cross examine that officer,consult with a lawyer specialist in 'Police regulation act' and hire for the cross with that officer along with your standing lawyer .
prashant pundhir
(Expert) 06 April 2011
Burden of proof to prove innocent is always on defance in criminal cases .
adv. rajeev ( rajoo )
(Expert) 06 April 2011
You are under wrong impression, your husband cannot be convicted only on the basis of the police evidence. If there is evidence against your husband by the complainant and other wittnesses then he can be convicted.
Advocate. Arunagiri
(Expert) 06 April 2011
Evidence Act:- 102. On whom burden of proof lies. - The burden of proof in a suit or proceeding lies on that person who would fail if no evidence at all were given on either side.
If the police officer is the only witness, the case itself is very weak case.
What is the current status of the case?
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 06 April 2011
There is NO other evidence, as he did not do this thing. I will provide his advocate with your thoughts and ask him to pursue them, especially on the police regulation act and the ability to prove malicious intent. Thank you for the help so far, and I will continue to read here for ANYTHING that might help us.
