The plea of alibi, a crucial defense strategy, is addressed under Section 9 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023. It essentially asserts that the accused was elsewhere at the time of the alleged crime, thus making their involvement impossible.

Core Principles:

• Burden of Proof: While the prosecution must prove the accused's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, the burden of establishing the plea of alibi lies with the accused.

• Certainty and Consistency: The alibi must be precise and consistent, specifying the location where the accused claims to have been. Vague or contradictory alibis are easily discredited.

• Corroboration: Strong alibis are typically supported by credible evidence, such as witness testimony, documentary proof (e.g., travel tickets, attendance records), or electronic evidence.

• Timely Presentation: the alibi must be presented at the earliest opportunity. If delayed, it can create doubt about its authenticity.

Section 9's Relevance:

Section 9 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam allows for the admissibility of facts that establish the identity of the accused, the place where they were at a particular time, or the relationship of parties. This encompasses evidence that supports or refutes an alibi. It permits the introduction of evidence that may identify someone as having been at a location other than the crime scene, effectively reinforcing the concept of alibi defense. While the plea of alibi places the primary burden of proof on the accused, information that supports or disproves that claim is admissible under Section 9.

Case Law Examples:

• State of Maharashtra v. Narsingrao A. Deshmukh (1996): In this case, the Supreme Court emphasized the importance of the accused providing satisfactory evidence to establish their alibi. A mere denial of presence is insufficient. The court stated that the accused must show, with reasonable certainty, that they were elsewhere.

• Dudhnath Pandey v. State of Uttar Pradesh (1981): The Supreme Court reiterated that the plea of alibi must be established with certainty, ruling that mere possibility or probability is insufficient. The accused needs to establish their presence elsewhere beyond reasonable doubt.

• Binay Kumar Singh v. State of Bihar (1997): This case underscores that the accused has to provide evidence that, if believed, renders their presence at the crime scene impossible. The evidence must be clear, reliable, and satisfactory.

• Munshi Prasad & Ors. v. State of Bihar (2002): The Supreme Court once again reiterated that if there is any doubt cast on the alibi of an accused, it is for the accused to dispel that doubt by clear and cogent evidence.

In summary, the plea of alibi is a significant defense, and while the prosecution must prove guilt, the accused has the onus of proving their absence convincingly. Section 9 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam facilitates the introduction of relevant evidence to either support or reject the claims made in an alibi defense.