Section 110

This rule comes from English common law principles on presumption of life and death, carried into Indian evidence law through the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (Section 107), and now restated in the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023. It exists because proving a negative (that someone is dead) is hard, and courts need a starting point. Since recent evidence of being alive is strong, the law places the burden on whoever claims death occurred, to prevent false claims of death (for inheritance, insurance, remarriage, etc.) without proof.

Indian courts have consistently held that this presumption of continuance of life applies only for thirty years from the last proof of being alive; after that period, a different presumption (under a related provision) may apply allowing courts to presume death after seven years of unexplained absence. Courts have clarified that this section deals with 'burden of proof', not conclusive proof — meaning the presumption can be rebutted by evidence, and the party asserting death must produce it.

• Myth: If someone disappears for many years, courts will automatically declare them dead.
  Fact: Courts require proof of death if the person was known to be alive within the last thirty years; only after seven or more years of unexplained absence (under a separate provision) can courts presume death, and even then, it isn't automatic — evidence and context matter.
• Myth: This provision proves someone is dead.
  Fact: It only decides who has the burden to prove death or life in a legal dispute — it doesn't itself establish whether someone is alive or dead.