When is evidence in rebuttal permitted in criminal cases?

Evidence in rebuttal is permitted in criminal cases typically when an alibi is introduced by the defense. The fundamental principle here is that the prosecution should be given the opportunity to counter any evidence that the defense uses to create reasonable doubt. When an alibi is advanced that was not previously foreseeable – meaning the prosecution could not have anticipated or prepared to address it – the rules allow for the introduction of rebuttal evidence specifically to challenge that alibi.

This approach maintains the integrity of the trial process by ensuring that both sides have a fair opportunity to present their case and to respond to unexpected claims. The prosecution's rebuttal should remain respectful of the principles of fairness and the right of the accused to a defense, so it's specifically tied to the nature of the evidence presented by the defense.

The other options suggest misleading or overly broad interpretations of when rebuttal evidence may be used. For example, asserting that rebuttal is permitted in every case infers a lack of specificity regarding conditions that warrant such evidence. Furthermore, the notion that it could be introduced only on a judge's request overlooks the more established procedural rights of the parties involved in relation to their evidentiary burdens.