Under section 105 of the Evidence Act –

i. The onus of proving exceptions mentioned in the Indian Penal Code, 1860 is on the accused, but the section does not at all indicate the nature and standard of proof required.

ii. The onus of proving exception mentioned in the Indian Penal Code, 1860 is on the accused and the section also indicates the nature and standard of proof required.

iii. The Evidence Act contemplates that the accused should prove his case with the same strictness and vigour as the prosecution is required to prove in a criminal charge.

iv. It is sufficient if the accused is able to prove his case by the standard of preponderance of probabilities envisaged by section 5 of the Evidence Act as a result of which he succeeds not because he proves his case to the guilt but because probability of the version given by him throws doubt on the prosecution

case and, therefore, the prosecution cannot be said to have established the charge beyond reasonable doubts.

v. Where are accused relies upon provocation in diminution of his responsibility, he has to prove that fact.

vi. The accused taking a plea in defence against the charge is not required necessarily to produce evidence in support of his plea. He can establish his plea by reference to circumstances as they emerge from the prosecution evidence itself.

vii. The accused taking a plea in defence against the charge is required necessarily to produce evidence in support of his plea. He cannot establish his plea by reference

to circumstances as they do not emerge from the prosecution evidence itself. 

viii. From a combined reading of section 105 and 4 of the Evidence Act, it may be inferred that where the existence of circumstances bringing the case within the exception is pleaded or is raised the court conclusively presume the absence of such circumstances as proved.

 Select the correct statements: