The law does not require that to be proved which is apparent to the court.
It is an old maxim which is used in modern times. It has been interpret by many jurist and has been analyzed in many cases.
This legal maxim says that “the law does not require that to be proved which is apparent to the court”
Lex Non Requirit Verificari Quod Apparet Curiae is a legal maxim, used in India, with the following meaning: The law does not require that which is apparent to the court to be verified. Apparent means” clearly visible or understood”.
So we can sum up the definition in simple sentence i.e. the law is not require to prove itself for the things which is already being understood or which is already clear. The law is not required to give any explanation about the things which is clear in itself.
Many of them were punished, some sent to Siberia, many died of cold and hunger on the road, many returned of their own accord, and the movement died down of itself just as it had sprung up, without apparent reason.
A.K. Saxena vs Union Of India
Apex Court judgment, it has been clearly mentioned that a decision regarding the guilt of a delinquent official must be made on the basis of some evidence, which is legally permissible. Therefore, when once the applicant was confronted with some evidence, which was fully admissible as proper and sufficient evidence in all judicial and quasi-judicial proceedings under the provisions of Section-36A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, read with provisions of Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962, the applicant cannot be allowed to derive any benefit from the judgment in the case of Roop Singh Negi (supra). We would rather go by the Latin Maxim Lexnon requirit verificari quod apparet curiae– that the law does not require that to be proved which is apparent to the Court.
Edited by Vigneshwar Ramasubramania
Approved & Published – Sakshi Raje