PRESUMPTIONS :

The Act recognises some rules as to presumptions. Rules of presumption are deduced from enlightened human knowledge and experience and are drawn from the connection, relation and coincidence of facts and circumstances. A presumption is not in itself an evidence but only makes a prima facie case for the party in whose favour it exists. A presumption is a rule of law that courts or juries shall or may draw a particular inference from a particular fact or from particular evidence unless and untill the truth of such inference is disproved. There are three categories of presumptions:

(i) presumptions of law, which is a rule of law that a particular inference shall be drawn by a court from particular circumstances.

(ii) presumptions of fact, it is a rule of law that a fact otherwise doubtful may be inferred from a fact which is proved.

(iii) mixed presumptions, they consider mainly certain inferences between the presumptions of law and presumptions of fact.

The terms presumption of law and presumption of fact are not defined by the Act. Section 4 only refers to the terms “conclusive proof”, “shall presume” and “may presume”. The term “conclusive proof” specifies those presumptions which in English Law are called irrebuttable presumptions of law; the term “shall presume” indicates rebuttable presumptions of law; the term “may presume” indicates presumptions of fact. When we see a man knocked down by a speeding car and a few yards away, there is a car going, there is a presumption of fact that the car has knocked down the man.