**The question consists of legal propositions/ principles (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion.**

**Principle:** Whoever desires any court to give judgment about any legal right or liability which depends on the existence of those facts which he asserts, must prove that those facts exist.

**Facts:** A asserts that B, C and D have committed an offense of criminal conspiracy and therefore A desires a Court to give judgment that B, C and D shall be punished for that crime which A says B, C and D have committed.

#### Options

A must prove that B, C and D have committed the crime

B, C and D must prove that they have not committed the crime

A must prove that B, C and D were present at the place of crime

Police must prove that B, C and D have committed the crime

#### Solution

**A must prove that B, C and D have committed the crime**

**Explanation:**

Option "A must prove that B, C and D have committed the crime" is correct and 'A' will have to prove that B, C, D have committed the crime, his words cannot be sufficient proof for legal punishment to BCD.

As per the principle guiding the case 'A' who diseases court of law to give judgement about liability which depends on the existence of facts which 'A' assets, must prove these facts exist.