support of his allegations, but must also convince the Tribunal of their truth, lest they be disreqarded for want, or insufficiency, 50. of proof ss With all these principles of law on burden of proof, burden of evidence and burden of persuasion, enunciated and quoted above, this Court holds fast to the notion that every material allegation of the claim must be justified by credible evidence and the defence should also sufficiently satisfy every defence and put forward what would rebut the claim or lake the risk of putting nothing at all if the claim by their estimation is weak and unproven. requirements 51. Where of probative annexed circumstances contended facts are placed to meet the above by the plaintiff, the claim would have failed. On the question documents insufficient value or weight to be attached to the affidavit to the motion depends to the on the of this case and as earlier explained above. The defendant that the plaintiff should prove that he is in prison custody because the detention warrant was not produced. Considering that the defence did not controvert the said documentary are admissible and probative value of high standards to them and acted upon them. the fact evidence, same would be attached Can such detention be then within the confines of the law? 52.· In the present case, in establishing its case the plaintiff produced documents' to show that the plaintiff was taken to Kirikiri prison in upon a holding charge by a Magistrate Court and has remained 2003 in the said prison till date. He the plaintiff swore to an affidavit before a notary pt:blic ir~J;:~1:!10.rLpl:i.i9l2.st<1tjng.th~\t.he date. 1-1is Counsel further relicti Oil was detained therein in 200:1 l ill '3' the notice lo produce the detention warrant served on the Deputy Comptroller of Prison of the defendant who did not react to same. In a situation where a notice to produce was served on the officer of the defendant to produce a vital document like 19