Introduction 

• Res Ispa Loquitur is a phase which means that the things that speak for itself. 
• The cases where the evidence is sufficient this maxim comes into role. 
• This doctrine is applicable where guilt can be directly pointed out with the evidence presented. 
• The cases where this maxim is applied the onus of proof directly shifts to the defendant. 
• Plaintiff can use circumstantial evidence to establish the guilt by applying Res Ispa Loquitur. 

Objectives of Res Ispa Loquitur  

• It promotes the idea of a fair trial where it becomes easy to prove all the possible facts and have no burden to prove something that is impossible and benefits the accused. 
• It provides the opportunity for the accused to rebut the presumption of facts which is derived from the series of facts. 

Principles Related to the Applicability of Resp Ispa Loquitor 

• The principles relating to the application Section 106 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (IEA) which are as follows: 
  • The Court should apply Section 106 of the IEA in criminal cases with care and caution. It cannot be said that it has no application to criminal cases. 
  • This maxim cannot be invoked to make up for the prosecution's inability to produce evidence of circumstances pointing to the accused's guilt. 
  • This maxim cannot be used to support a conviction unless the prosecution has discharged the onus by proving all the elements necessary to establish the offence. 
  • It does not absolve the prosecution from the duty of proving that a crime was committed even though it is a matter specifically within the knowledge of the accused and it does not throw the burden on the accused to show that no crime was committed. 
  • This maxim has no application to cases where the fact in question, having regard to its nature, is such as to be capable of being known not only to the accused but also to others, if they happened to be present when it took place. 
  • This maxim would apply to cases where the prosecution could be said to have succeeded in proving facts from which a reasonable inference can be drawn regarding guilt of the accused. 

Section 109 of Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023(BSA) 

• Section 109 of Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023 (BSA) is given under part IV under chapter VII.  
• Earlier the same section was covered under Section 106 of the IEA, under part III under chapter VII.  
• Section 109, Burden of proving fact especially within knowledge states as follows — 
  • When any fact is especially within the knowledge of any person, the burden of proving that fact is upon him.  
  • Illustration: 
    • When a person does an act with some intention other than that which the character and circumstances of the act suggest, the burden of proving that intention is upon him. 
    • A is charged with travelling on a railway without a ticket. The burden of proving that he had a ticket is on him.”

Res Ispa Loquitor and Prima Facie Evidence 

• Prima facie evidence is evidence which helps to prove or disprove the fact. 
• While the Res Ispa Loquitor is applied when no other reasonable cause is present for the event and the facts are evident of the liability. 
• Both doctrines are not conclusive and can be rebutted. 

What are Landmark Judgements Related to Res Ispa Loquitor? 

• Nagendra Shah v. State of Bihar (2021): 
  • The Supreme Court reinforced that, in cases resting on circumstantial evidence, an accused's failure to provide a reasonable explanation as required by Section 106 of IEA could serve as an additional link in the chain of circumstances. 
• Shambhu Nath Mehra v. The State of Ajmer (1956): 
  • The Supreme Court held that word especially stresses that it means facts that are pre-eminently or exceptionally within his knowledge.  
  • If the section were to be interpreted otherwise, it would lead to the very startling conclusion that in a murder case the burden lies on the accused to prove that he did not commit the murder because who could know better than he whether he did or did not. 
• Anees v. The State Govt of NCT (2015):  
  • In this case the Supreme Court expounded the principles relating to the application of Section 106 of the IEA 
• Sri Rajen Nayak v. The State of Assam & Anr (2024): 
  • It was held that the accused has a right to remain silent and the burden of proof cannot be shifted upon the accused under the provisions of Section 106 of the IEA when multiple witnesses to the crime were present. 

Conclusion 

Section 109 of BNS is an exception to Section 104 of BNS (earlier section 109 of BNS was covered under Section 106 of IEA and section 104 of BNS was covered under Section 101 of IEA). The facts predominantly in the knowledge of the accused need not be proved. A prima facie case must be established for applying the maxim of Res Ispa Loquitur by the prosecution. This maxim comes into play in cases of custodial death, dowry death and in cases of alibi.