Conclusive proof
Also called: Irrebuttable presumption, Conclusive presumption
Where the Adhiniyam declares one fact to be conclusive proof of another, the Court, on proof of the first, must treat the other as proved and cannot allow evidence to disprove it. Section 2(1)(b) of the BSA.
Explained
Section 2(1)(b) of the BSA provides that when one fact is declared by the Adhiniyam to be conclusive proof of another, the Court shall, on proof of the one fact, regard the other as proved, and shall not allow evidence to be given for the purpose of disproving it. The same definition was earlier in Section 4 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. It is the strongest of the three kinds of presumption, the others being may presume under Section 2(1)(h) and shall presume under Section 2(1)(l).
The difference lies in what the Court may do after the basic fact is proved. Where it may presume, the Court has a discretion either to regard the fact as proved unless disproved or to call for proof. Where it shall presume, it must regard the fact as proved unless and until it is disproved, so rebuttal is allowed. Where a fact is conclusive proof, no rebuttal evidence is admitted at all. Conclusive proof is often described as a rule of substantive law in evidentiary form, and it arises only where the statute declares it.
The leading instance is Section 116 (earlier Section 112), under which birth during a valid marriage, or within 280 days after its dissolution while the mother remains unmarried, is conclusive proof of legitimacy, unless it is shown that the parties had no access to each other when the child could have been begotten. Section 35 (earlier Section 41) makes a final judgment in probate, matrimonial, admiralty or insolvency jurisdiction conclusive proof of the legal character it confers or takes away. By contrast, Section 25 states that admissions are not conclusive proof of the matters admitted, though they may operate as estoppels.
Examiners match the three presumptions with their meanings and ask how far Section 116 can be displaced. In Nandlal Wasudeo Badwaik v. Lata Nandlal Badwaik the Supreme Court held that a genuine DNA test report showing that the husband was not the father must prevail over the conclusive proof of legitimacy.
What the law says
(b) “conclusive proof” means when one fact is declared by this Adhiniyam to be conclusive proof of another, the Court shall, on proof of the one fact, regard the other as proved, and shall not allow evidence to be given for the purpose of disproving it;
Section 2(1)(b) defines conclusive proof; (h) and (l) define the other presumptions
Earlier law: IEA 3. Interpretation-clause. 4. ― May Presume. ―Shall presume. ―Conclusive proof.
The fact that any person was born during the continuance of a valid marriage between his mother and any man, or within two hundred and eighty days after its dissolution, the mother remaining unmarried, shall be conclusive proof that he is the legitimate child of that man, unless it can be shown that the parties to the marriage had no access to each other at any time when he could have been begotten.
Birth during marriage as conclusive proof of legitimacy
Earlier law: IEA 112. Birth during marriage, conclusive proof of legitimacy.
(2) Such judgment, order or decree is conclusive proof that—
(i) any legal character, which it confers accrued at the time when such judgment, order or decree came into operation;
(ii) any legal character, to which it declares any such person to be entitled, accrued to that person at the time when such judgment, order or decree declares it to have accrued to that person;
Judgments in rem as conclusive proof of legal character
Earlier law: IEA 41. Relevancy of certain judgments in probate, etc., jurisdiction.
Admissions are not conclusive proof of the matters admitted but they may operate as estoppels under the provisions hereinafter contained.
Admissions are not conclusive proof but may estop
Earlier law: IEA 31. Admissions not conclusive proof, but may estop.
Earlier law: Section 4, Evidence Act
Example
For example, a child is born to W ten months into her valid marriage with H. Under Section 116 of the BSA this is conclusive proof that the child is H's legitimate child, unless non-access at the relevant time is shown.
For the exam
- Conclusive proof: Section 2(1)(b) BSA, earlier Section 4 of the Evidence Act.
- May presume is discretionary, shall presume is rebuttable, conclusive proof allows no rebuttal evidence.
- Section 116 BSA: birth in wedlock or within 280 days of dissolution is conclusive proof of legitimacy.
- Section 116 yields only to proof of non-access; DNA evidence prevailed in Nandlal Wasudeo Badwaik.
- Admissions are not conclusive proof but may operate as estoppels (Section 25 BSA).
71 questions in the Law Maker question bank use this term. Practise Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam questions
Judgments
Related terms
- EvidenceUnder Section 2(1)(e) of the BSA, statements of witnesses before the Court, including those given electronically (oral evidence), and documents, including digital records, produced for its inspection (documentary evidence).
- FactAnything, state of things or relation of things capable of being perceived by the senses, and any mental condition of which a person is conscious (Section 2(1)(f) of the BSA).
- Facts in issueFacts from which, alone or with other facts, the existence, non-existence, nature or extent of a right, liability or disability asserted or denied in a suit or proceeding necessarily follows (Section 2(1)(g) of the BSA).
- JudgmentUnder Section 2(9) of the CPC, the statement given by the Judge of the grounds of a decree or order.
- Foreign judgmentThe judgment of a foreign Court, meaning a Court outside India not established or continued by Central Government authority. It is conclusive in India unless one of the six exceptions in Section 13 of the CPC applies.
Further reading
Checked 6 November 2026. Statutory text is quoted from the Bare Acts library, taken from India Code. See the full glossary.