New Delhi, Oct. 22 -- The Supreme Court has held that the traditional rule relating to the prosecution's burden of proof in criminal cases cannot be applied in a "pedantic" manner, cautioning that such rigidity would allow offenders in serious offences to go unpunished while society becomes the casualty. A bench of justices Sanjay Kumar and Alok Aradhe made the observation while restoring the conviction of a Madhya Pradesh man who murdered his daughter-in-law 27 years ago but was acquitted by the state high court. The top court said that while the prosecution must ordinarily prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, Section 106 of the Evidence Act requires an accused to explain facts especially within their knowledge, and failure to do so can strengthen the prosecution's case. "The traditional rule relating to burden of proof of the prosecution cannot be allowed to be wrapped in a pedantic coverage; the offenders in serious offences would be the major beneficiaries and the society would be the casualty," held the bench. P4...