Many statutes require recording of reasons to believe
or actions are based on sufficiency of reasons to believe. In this context, the
following aspects would be relevant:
Supreme Court has held in Income Tax Officer v.
Lakhmani Mewaldas 1976 (3) SCR 956 and Phool Chand Bajrang Lal v. ITO [1993]
203 ITR 456 (SC)that there should be a link between the evidence resulting to
any reason to believe. It has been held in Aslam Mohd Merchant v. Competent
Authority(2008) 14 SCC 186, that there must be some material for reason to
believe before initiating the proceedings.
Section 26 of the Indian Penal Code defines “reasons
to believe”, as a person is said to have “reason to believe” a thing if he has sufficient
cause to believe that thing but not otherwise. Thus, the phrase
“reason” to believe, must hinge on “sufficiency” of cause.
