Statutory presumption

In the answer to your query, I wish to tell you that a statutory presumption means any presumption which is created by a statute, which can be rebutted or challenged if a contrary evidence is available but if no evidence is available, they are decisive in their stand, meaning that if no evidence is available to contradict the statutory presumption, such presumption must be held as the truth. They generally serve as guiding light for the judicial courts as these presumptions lay down the direction in which the courts should go when the proceedings commence. Such statutory presumptions are rule of evidence and do not lay out a liability in themselves. They also do not shift the burden of proof, but just gives some clarity as to what needs to be proven by the party to get the decision in their favour.

For example, under Indian Evidence Act, there is a presumption that a dying declaration is generally true. So, in a case where a dying person, upon asking who is his killer, points to a person and dies, such person would be considered as the killer. But if the accused is able to prove that he could not have killed the person, he would be set free and the dying declaration would stand rebutted. It won’t mean that only the accused has to prove his innocence and that the opposite party will not have anything to do. Burden of proving the guilt of the person lies on the prosecution as well and they cannot solely rely on the dying declaration.

Hope this satisfies your query.