The Principles governing plea of Alibi

By Saurav Yadav

Published on: December 19, 2023 at 14:58 IST

A person who has committed a crime can be saved very easily if somehow it is proved in the court of law that at the time of commencement of crime, he was not present at the place of the crime scene, this concept in legal language can be said as plea of alibi, this is what going be discussed in this article.

A plea of alibi is a legal defence wherein the accused claims to have been elsewhere on the time a crime for which they’re charged became dedicated. Essentially, it is an assertion that the accused was not present on the location where the alleged offense came about. The term “alibi” is derived from Latin, meaning “some other place.”

The phrase ‘alibi’ is applicable within the research of criminal and evidence regulation. In evidence regulation, an alibi is a defence or an excuse used commonly to ward off the blame or punishment given to the accused.

Provisions of the law that deal with plea of alibi 

It is a rule of evidence mentioned in Section 11 of the Indian Evidence Act. The Section describes that statistics which might be in any other case now not applicable become applicable under the following situations:

1. If such data are inconsistent with any of the statistics in the issue or applicable statistics of the case.
2. If such facts by using themselves or in connection with another information may want to make the existence or nonexistence of another statistics in trouble or applicable information relatively likely or extraordinarily unbelievable.

Section 11 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 reads as “When facts not otherwise relevant become relevant

Facts not otherwise relevant are relevant-

(1) If they are inconsistent with any fact is issue or relevant fact;

(2) If by themselves or in connection with other facts they make the existence or non-existence of any fact in issue or relevant fact highly probable or improbable“

Illustration

(a) The question is, whether A committed a crime at Calcutta on a certain day.

The fact that, on that day, A was at Lahore is relevant.

The fact that, near the time when the crime was committed, A was at a distance from the place where it was committed. Which would render it highly improbable, though not impossible, that he committed it, is relevant.

In this situation, the truth that, on that specific day, A turned into at Lahore will become applicable. This is an example of the plea of alibi.

(b) The question is, whether A committed a crime.

The circumstances are such that the crime must have been committed either by A,B,C or D. Every fact which shows that the crime could have been committed by no one else and that it was not committed by either B, C or D is relevant.

This scenario does not involve proving the accused’s presence at a specific alternative vicinity, that’s a key element of the plea of alibi.

Section 103 of Indian Evidence Act,1872 read as “Burden of proof as to particular fact

The burden of proof as to any particular fact lies on that person who wishes the Court to believe in its existence, unless it is provided by any law that the proof of that fact shall lie on any particular person.“

Illustration

• A prosecutes B for theft, and wishes the Court to believe that B admitted the theft to C, A must prove the admission.

[In this scenario, A is the prosecutor, and A wishes to convince the court that B admitted to the theft. Here, the legal principle is that the party making an assertion or claim bears the burden of proving it.]

• B wishes the Court to believe that, at the time in question, he was elsewhere. He must prove it.

[In this scenario, B is the accused, and B wishes to establish an alibi, claiming that he was elsewhere at the time the theft took place. The legal principle here is that the accused, B, also bears the burden of proving their defense.]

Who can take Plea of alibi?

The plea of alibi may be taken via the accused in a criminal trial. It is a protection approach wherein the accused claims to had been somewhere else on the time the alleged crime came about, putting forward that they could not have devoted the offense due to the fact they had been in a specific location.

Here are key points concerning who can take the plea of alibi:

1. Accused Person: The number one person who can assert the plea of alibi is the accused person dealing with crook charges. It is a defence strategy that the accused can raise for the duration of the trial to contest the prosecution’s claims.
2. Defence Counsel: The protection recommends, representing the accused, plays a vital function in supplying and arguing the alibi protection. The protection legal professional works to gather evidence, interview witnesses, and present a resounding case to assist the alibi claim.
3. Notice to Prosecution: In many jurisdictions, there can be a demand for the accused to offer observe to the prosecution in the event that they intend to depend upon an alibi defence. This word is generally given earlier than the trial to permit the prosecution to prepare and check out the alibi.
4. Burden of Proof at the Defence: The burden of proving the alibi typically rests on the protection. The defence need to gift proof that establishes, to the pleasure of the courtroom, that the accused was at a one-of-a-kind region while the alleged crime befell.
5. Witnesses Supporting Alibi: Witnesses who can testify to the accused’s presence at the alternative region all through the applicable time are important for a successful alibi protection. These witnesses can be people who had been with the accused or can vouch for his or her whereabouts.

It’s essential to word that the effectiveness of the plea of alibi depends at the energy of the evidence provided and the credibility of the protection’s case. The court docket evaluates the alibi in the context of the general trial, considering the consistency and reliability of the evidence. If the court reveals the alibi credible, it can serve as a complete protection to the charges. However, if there are doubts or inconsistencies, the court may reject the alibi defence.

When does the plea of alibi fail:

The plea of alibi might also fail for diverse reasons, and the effectiveness of this protection relies upon at the particular instances of every case. Some common reasons why a plea of alibi would possibly fail include:

1. Weak or Contradictory Evidence: If the evidence helping the alibi is susceptible, inconsistent, or contradicted by way of other credible proof, the courtroom might not locate it convincing. The court docket assesses the satisfactory and reliability of the alibi evidence in figuring out its credibility.
2. Lack of Corroboration: An alibi defence is typically greater powerful when supported by way of corroborating proof, together with witness stories, files, or surveillance photos. If the alibi lacks sufficient corroboration, it could be less persuasive to the court.
3. Late Notification to Prosecution: In jurisdictions in which there may be a demand for the accused to offer note to the prosecution concerning the purpose to rely on an alibi, a late or insufficient notification can also negatively affect the protection. The court docket may additionally view such tardiness as prejudicial to the prosecution’s capacity to put together and reply.
4. Credibility Issues: If the witnesses helping the alibi are deemed unreliable, lack credibility, or have a purpose to lie, the court docket may question the truthfulness of the alibi defence. The credibility of witnesses is a vital aspect in determining the electricity of the alibi.
5. Inconsistent Statements via the Accused: If the accused affords inconsistent statements regarding their whereabouts or if there are contradictions of their statements over the years, the court may additionally view this as detrimental to the credibility of the alibi protection.
6. Failure to Explain Presence at the Crime Scene: If the accused fails to offer an inexpensive reason for being gift at or near the crime scene, the courtroom may be less willing to simply accept the alibi. The protection must address any circumstances that could advocate the accused’s involvement within the alleged offense.
7. Prejudice to the Prosecution: The courtroom may also recollect whether or not the alibi protection unfairly prejudices the prosecution. For example, if the protection affords a surprise alibi without ok observe, it can be visible as prejudicial to the prosecution’s ability to behaviour a thorough research.
8. Jury or Judge Assessment: In jury trials, the effectiveness of an alibi protection can be influenced with the aid of how the jury perceives the evidence and the credibility of witnesses. In a bench trial (wherein a judge comes to a decision the case), the judge plays a crucial function in comparing the alibi’s strength.

Essential of plea of alibi;

1. Timely Notice to the Prosecution

2. Specificity in the Alibi Claim

3. Corroborating Evidence

4. Consistency in Statements

5. Absence of Opportunity to Commit the Crime

6. Exclusion of Other Possibilities

7. Testimony of Alibi Witnesses

8. Credibility of the Accused

9. Availability of Alibi Witnesses

In the case of Kamal Prasad & ors V. The state of Madhya Pradesh, 2012 In its judgment, the Court laid out unique ideas associated with the plea of alibi.

These concepts were derived from numerous landmark choices, consisting of Dhananjoy Chatterjee v. State of W.B., (1994), and Vijay Pal v. State (Govt. Of NCT of Delhi) (2015).

Some of the key principles referred to in the judgment include:

1. The plea of alibi isn’t always part of the General Exceptions underneath the Indian Penal Code (IPC) however is taken into consideration a rule of evidence under Section eleven of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
2. The burden to set up the plea of alibi lies with the individual making the declare. This must be accomplished by way of presenting clean and best evidence.
3. The plea of alibi should be proven with actuality, absolutely except for the opportunity of the accused being gift at the crime scene. A strict scrutiny general is required when providing one of such plea.

In the case of Munshi Prasad v. State of Bihar (2001), the accused, along with a group, surrounded the deceased and his brother as they returned from the market. The accused, armed with dangerous weapons, attacked the victims. The informant managed to escape, leaving his brother behind. The accused, in their defense, claimed to have an alibi, asserting that a witness saw them 400-500 yards away from the crime spot.

The court addressed two crucial issues in this case:

1. Applicability of Alibi Defiance: The court deliberated whether the accused’s defiance of alibi was valid before the court.
2. Impossibility of Committing the Crime: The court considered whether being 400-500 yards away from the crime spot rendered it impossible for the accused to commit the crime.

The judgment ruled against the accused, emphasizing that the distance from the crime scene did not constitute an impossibility for the accused to commit the crime. As per the alibi plea, the accused failed to establish their absence during the incident. Consequently, they were prosecuted, convicted, and sentenced to ten years of rigorous imprisonment.

In Gurpreet Singh v. State of Haryana (2002), the appellant was accused and convicted of murdering his wife, who was burned alive due to marital discord. The appellant claimed an alibi, stating he was at the Gymkhana club and learned about the fire at his house only when he was there.

The key issue in this case was whether the court could accept the plea of alibi presented by the accused and his brother.

The court’s judgment refuted the alibi plea, stating that the evidence presented by the prosecution demonstrated the appellant’s presence at the crime scene. The burn marks on the appellant’s body were linked to the burning of his wife’s body. Consequently, the court rejected the alibi plea, affirming the appellant’s guilt in the murder of his wife.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the legal framework surrounding the plea of alibi is nuanced and pivotal in determining the guilt or innocence of the accused in criminal cases. The scope of the plea of alibi is within the hands of the accused, who has to prove his innocence by demonstrating to the court that he was somewhere else when the crime was committed, of which he has been accused.

The legal framework governing the plea of alibi is encapsulated in Section 11 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, which stipulates the circumstances under which otherwise irrelevant facts become pertinent in establishing an alibi. The burden of proof, as defined in Section 103 of the same Act, lies on the party asserting a particular fact, be it the prosecution or the defense.

In essence, while the plea of alibi offers a potential shield for the accused, its success demands meticulous preparation, adherence to legal procedures, and the presentation of compelling evidence. As demonstrated by the discussed cases, the courts meticulously weigh the merits of alibi defenses, underscoring the critical role this legal strategy plays in the pursuit of justice within the criminal justice system.