The legal maxim, ‘Actori Incubit Onus Probandi’ contains the principle of evidence. This article explains the meaning of the maxim along with illustrations and case laws. Origin and Meaning Actori Incubit Onus Probandi is a legal maxim of Latin origin. Onus Probandi in Latin means ‘the burden of proof’ and generally, the burden of proof is on the person filing the case i.e. the plaintiff and hence, the maxim means, ‘the burden of proof lies on the...
The legal maxim, ‘Actori Incubit Onus Probandi’ contains the principle of evidence. This article explains the meaning of the maxim along with illustrations and case laws.
Origin and Meaning
Actori Incubit Onus Probandi is a legal maxim of Latin origin. Onus Probandi in Latin means ‘the burden of proof’ and generally, the burden of proof is on the person filing the case i.e. the plaintiff and hence, the maxim means, ‘the burden of proof lies on the plaintiff’.
Explanation
It is a general principle that the person who brings up the case n the court of law is the one who has the burden of proof to prove the claims being made by him.
Application
In Civil Cases:
Once the case has been filed in the court of law, the plaintiff has to support the case with sufficient and strong proof that the claims being made by him are valid. This increases the chances of winning the case.
In Criminal Cases:
In criminal cases, the burden of proof lies on the prosecutor. A prosecutor is a public official who charges a person with a crime and tries to prove his guilt in the court of law. Similar to civil matters, the showing of proof by the prosecutor will increase the chances of winning.
Important Case Laws
In the case of Sh. Kedar Nath Kohli v. Sh. Shardul Singh[1], the district court held that Actori Incubit Onus Probandi is the rule of law. It was further stated that the plaintiff needs to present strong proof and his case cannot be established on the account of the weakness of the case of the opposite party.
In the case of Sh. Kalyan Kumar Basu v. Sh. Veer Singh[2], the court held that the mere fact that the written statement of the defendant has been stuck off does not automatically imply that the claims made by the plaintiff are valid.
Reference
[1] 107 (2003) DLT 577.
[2] AIR 142 Cal 360.
- Law Library: Notes and Study Material for LLB, LLM, Judiciary and Entrance Exams
- Legal Bites Academy – Ultimate Test Prep Destination
