Conclusive proofs are considered final and cannot be rebutted by any evidence suggesting the contrary. SEC 4 OF INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT.  talks about "CONCLUSIVE PROOF"

There are certain legal aspects while proving the existence of certain facts. They are:

1. Proved.

2. Disproved.

3 Not proved.

4. Conclusive proof.

Sec 4 of the Indian Evidence Act says

1. MAY presume 2. Shall presume 3. Conclusive proof.

Let us consider what conclusive proof is. "Conclusive of the one fact, regard the other as proved, and shall not allow evidence to be given for the purpose of disproving it"

In short, "if one fact is proved, no requirement to prove the existence of other coexisting facts"

Example No.1. Child born to a woman before 145 days of divorce is considered as legitimate child of her former husband. There is no need to prove that such a child born after divorce is legitimate.

Example No. 2. 'A' flies from Mumbai to Delhi in aircraft.

Here not necessary to prove that A has got inside the aircraft after stepping on the ladder. Stepping on the ladder and getting inside the aircraft at Mumbai airport need not be proved. This fact is associated with journey through aircraft. The defendant is estopped from denying this truth.

Example No. 3. Lightning itself proved when we heard thunder from inside our home.

In short, conclusive proof is concrete and proved by itself with facts proven associated with it. The Court shall presume or Court may presume on the existence of a certain fact. But inconclusive proof, the court or any prudent man shall believe the existence of certain facts as true. And no need to lead further evidence.

Conclusive proof is based on the principle "IF ONE FACT IS PROVED, THE OTHER FACT ASSOCIATED WITH IT NEED NOT BE PROVED"

Asiya vs Hameed on 31 March, 2009

Section 113 of the Indian Evidence Act prescribes that when a notification is issued in the Official Gazette regarding the cession of territory to the native state, it is considered as conclusive proof of a valid cession that occurred on the mentioned date in the notification. No evidence can disprove this final conclusion.

Difference between conclusive proof and conclusive evidence.

In the case of Smt. Sonawanti and others v. the State of Punjab and others (MANU/SC/0034/1962), the Apex Court dismissed the distinction that is often established between ‘conclusive proof’ and ‘conclusive evidence’. It was observed that it is often contended that where a fact has been declared to be ‘conclusive proof’ by the law, then the court is precluded from considering any evidence suggesting the contrary once such a conclusion is established. Thus, where a fact has been made out as conclusive proof of another fact and it is established to be true, then the court is supposed to proceed further considering it to be final. On the other hand, where the law makes a fact the ‘conclusive evidence’ of another fact, then the possibility of presenting other evidence proving the contrary is not shut out.

However, this argument was rejected and it was declared that there was no difference between ‘conclusive proof’ and ‘conclusive evidence’, both suggesting a final conclusion to be adopted by the court.

Author : Adv (Dr.) Prashant Mali ♛ [MSc(Comp Sci), LLM, Ph.D.] is a practicing lawyer and has expertise in Electronic Evidence matters Email: prashant.mali@cyberlawconsulting.com