JusticeMarg.com

Profile
go Premium
Menu

Chapter 5: Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023

Uncategorized /

CHAPTER V: OF DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE

Section 56: Proof of contents of documents.

  • Legal Text: The contents of documents may be proved either by primary or by secondary evidence.
  • Simple English: This is the foundational rule for this chapter. To prove what a document says, you must use:
    1. Primary Evidence (the original document).
    2. Secondary Evidence (a copy or oral testimony, but only in specific situations allowed by the law).

Section 57: Primary evidence.

  • Legal Text: Primary evidence means the document itself produced for the inspection of the Court.
  • Simple English: Primary evidence is the original thing. It’s the “real” document, not a copy.
  • Explanation 1: Where a document is executed in several parts, each part is primary evidence of the document.
    • Simple English: If multiple identical copies are made, and all parties sign all copies, then each copy is considered an “original” (primary evidence).
    • Example: A landlord and tenant sign two copies of a rent agreement at the same time. Both are primary evidence.
  • Explanation 2: Where a document is executed in counterpart, each counterpart being executed by one or some of the parties only, each counterpart is primary evidence as against the parties executing it.
    • Simple English: This is common in contracts. You and the other party sign two copies, but you swap them. You sign their copy, and they sign your copy.
    • Example: A (Landlord) signs the copy for B (Tenant). B signs the copy for A.
      • The copy A has (signed by B) is primary evidence against B.
      • The copy B has (signed by A) is primary evidence against A.
  • Explanation 3: Where a number of documents are all made by one uniform process, as in the case of printing, lithography or photography, each is primary evidence of the contents of the rest; but, where they are all copies of a common original, they are not primary evidence of the contents of the original.
    • Simple English: This is for mass-produced documents like newspapers or books.
    • Example (from Illustration): A person prints 500 identical “WANTED” posters. Poster #1 is primary evidence of Poster #2 (they are identical). But none of the posters are primary evidence of the original typeset or Word document they were printed from.
  • Explanation 4: Where an electronic or digital record is created or stored…simultaneously or sequentially in multiple files, each such file is primary evidence.
    • Simple English: When you save a file, your computer might create the file itself, a temp file, and a backup file. Each of these is considered “primary evidence.”
  • Explanation 5: Where an electronic or digital record is produced from proper custody, such electronic and digital record is primary evidence unless it is disputed.
    • Simple English: An electronic file (e.g., a server log, an email) produced from its normal, expected location (e.g., the company’s IT server) is considered “primary evidence” unless the other side disputes its authenticity.
  • Explanation 6: Where a video recording is simultaneously stored…and transmitted…each of the stored recordings is primary evidence.
    • Simple English: If a CCTV camera simultaneously streams the video to a monitor and saves it to a DVR hard drive, the recording on the DVR is primary evidence.
  • Explanation 7: Where an electronic or digital record is stored in multiple storage spaces in a computer resource, each such automated storage, including temporary files, is primary evidence.
    • Simple English: This is a more technical version of Expl. 4. It clarifies that a file, its fragments, its cache, and its temp files are all considered primary evidence.

Section 58: Secondary evidence.

  • Legal Text: Secondary evidence includes—
  • Simple English: “Secondary evidence” is any proof of a document’s contents other than the original (Primary Evidence). This includes:
    • (i) certified copies…
      • Example: A copy of a public document (like a land deed) that is officially stamped and “certified” as a true copy by the government registrar.
    • (ii) copies made from the original by mechanical processes which in themselves ensure the accuracy of the copy, and copies compared with such copies;
      • Example: A photocopy (Xerox) or a photograph of the original.
    • (iii) copies made from or compared with the original;
      • Example: A person handwrites a copy of the original and then compares it to the original to ensure it’s accurate.
    • (iv) counterparts of documents as against the parties who did not execute them;
      • Example: (See Expl. 2 from Sec 57). A (Landlord) signs B’s (Tenant’s) copy. That copy is primary evidence against A, but it is only secondary evidence against B.
    • (v) oral accounts of the contents of a document given by some person who has himself seen it;
      • Example: A witness testifies, “I personally read the original will before it burned. I remember it said…”
    • (vi) oral admissions;
      • Example: A witness testifies, “The defendant admitted to me that his contract had a non-compete clause.”
    • (vii) written admissions;
      • Example: An email from the defendant saying, “I know my contract has a non-compete clause, but I’m ignoring it.”
    • (viii) evidence of a person who has examined a document, the original of which consists of numerous accounts…
      • Example: An auditor who has examined 10,000 invoices (which can’t all be brought to court) gives a summary testimony of the total financial result.
  • Illustrations:
    • (a) A photograph of an original… is secondary evidence (under 58(ii)).
    • (b) A copy compared with a copy…made by a copying machine… is secondary evidence. (e.g., a handwritten copy of a photocopy).
    • (c) A copy transcribed from a copy, but afterwards compared with the original, is secondary evidence… (This is valid, because it was ultimately checked against the original). …but the copy not so compared is not secondary evidence… (A “copy of a copy” is not valid unless it was compared to the original).

Section 59: Proof of documents by primary evidence.

  • Legal Text: Documents shall be proved by primary evidence except in the cases hereinafter mentioned.
  • Simple English: This is the “Best Evidence Rule.” The default rule is that you must prove a document by producing the original (Primary Evidence). You can only use a copy (Secondary Evidence) if you have a legally valid excuse, which is listed in the next section.

Section 60: Cases in which secondary evidence relating to documents may be given.

  • Legal Text: Secondary evidence may be given of the existence, condition, or contents of a document in the following cases, namely:-
  • Simple English: You are allowed to use Secondary Evidence (a copy) only if you can prove one of the following excuses:
    • (a) when the original is…in the possession…of the person against whom the document is…proved…or of any person out of reach…or…legally bound to produce it, and…does not produce it;
      • Excuse: “The other side has the original contract, and even after we sent them a legal ‘notice to produce,’ they are refusing to bring it.”
    • (b) when the existence, condition or contents of the original have been proved to be admitted in writing by the person against whom it is proved…
      • Excuse: “We don’t need the original, because the defendant already admitted what it says in this email (a written admission).”
    • (c) when the original has been destroyed or lost, or when the party…cannot…produce it in reasonable time;
      • Excuse: “The original will was lost in a flood,” or “The original contract was accidentally shredded.”
    • (d) when the original is of such a nature as not to be easily movable;
      • Excuse: “The ‘document’ is a giant inscription carved into a stone monument or painted on a building wall.”
    • (e) when the original is a public document…
      • Excuse: “The original is a public document (like a government land record), which cannot be removed from the government office.”
    • (f) when the original is a document of which a certified copy is permitted by this Adhiniyam…
      • Excuse: This is similar to (e). The law allows certified copies for certain documents, so you can use one.
    • (g) when the originals consist of numerous accounts or other documents…and the fact to be proved is the general result…
      • Excuse: “We are trying to prove the company’s total sales, which are based on 10,000 separate invoices. We can’t bring them all.”
  • Explanation (Crucial Part): This explains what type of secondary evidence (from Sec 58) you can use for which excuse (from Sec 60).
    • (i) [for excuses (a), (c), (d)]…any secondary evidence…is admissible.
      • Simple English: If the original is lost, destroyed, or held by the other side, you can use any type of copy (a photocopy, a handwritten copy, or even just oral testimony).
      • Example: The original will is lost (excuse ‘c’). You can prove it with a photocopy OR have a witness testify orally what it said (oral account under 58(v)).
    • (ii) [for excuse (b)]…the written admission is admissible.
      • Simple English: If your excuse is that the other side admitted the contents in writing, you must produce that written admission.
    • (iii) [for excuses (e) or (f)]…a certified copy…but no other kind of secondary evidence, is admissible.
      • Simple English: This is a strict rule. To prove a public document (like a birth certificate or land deed), you must use a Certified Copy (58(i)). You cannot use a plain photocopy or oral testimony.
    • (iv) [for excuse (g)]…evidence may be given as to the general result…by any person who has examined them…
      • Simple English: For the 10,000 invoices, you must use the testimony of the expert (the auditor) who examined them (as per 58(viii)).

Section 61: Electronic or digital record.

  • Legal Text: Nothing in this Adhiniyam shall apply to deny the admissibility of an electronic or digital record in the evidence on the ground that it is an electronic or digital record and such record shall, subject to section 63, have the same legal effect, validity and enforceability as other document.
  • Simple English: This is a foundational rule. A court cannot refuse to accept a piece of evidence just because it is in a digital format (e.g., an email, a PDF, a video file).
  • As long as you follow the special rules for electronic evidence (laid out in Section 63), a digital record is to be treated as just as valid and enforceable as a physical paper document.
  • Example: A party submits a printed-out PDF of a contract. The other side objects, “Your Honour, that’s just a printout, not the original paper contract.” This section says that objection is invalid on its own. The court must consider the PDF, if the rules in Section 63 are met.

Section 62: Special provisions as to evidence relating to electronic record.

  • Legal Text: The contents of electronic records may be proved in accordance with the provisions of section 63.
  • Simple English: This is a simple signpost. It says that to prove the contents of an electronic record, you must follow the procedure laid out in Section 63.

Section 63: Admissibility of electronic records.

This is the most critical section for digital evidence. It explains how to prove a computer-generated document (like a printout or a file on a pen drive) is authentic. It states that a “computer output” (the printout, the file) shall be deemed a document and is admissible as evidence if you satisfy four conditions.

  • Section 63(1): Notwithstanding anything contained in this Adhiniyam, any information contained in an electronic record…produced by a computer… (hereinafter referred to as the computer output) shall be deemed to be also a document, if the conditions mentioned in this section are satisfied…and shall be admissible in any proceedings, without further proof or production of the original…
  • Simple English: A “computer output” (like a printout of an email, a bank statement, or a CCTV clip burned to a CD) will be treated as an original document if you fulfill the conditions in sub-section (2). If you do, you don’t need to produce the “original” (e.g., the giant server the email was stored on).
  • Section 63(2): The conditions referred to in sub-section (1) in respect of a computer output shall be the following, namely:-
  • Simple English: These are the four famous conditions you must prove (usually with a certificate) for your electronic evidence to be accepted.
    • (a) the computer output…was produced by the computer or communication device during the period over which the computer or Communication device was used regularly to create, store or process information…
      • Simple English: The computer that made the printout (or the device that created the file, like a CCTV recorder) must have been in regular use at the time.
      • Example: The bank statement printout came from the bank’s main server, which is used regularly for banking activities.
    • (b) …information of the kind contained in the electronic record…was regularly fed into the computer or Communication device in the ordinary course of the said activities;
      • Simple English: The type of data in the file must be routinely fed into that computer.
      • Example: For a bank’s server, “customer transaction data” (the information) is regularly fed into it in the ordinary course of business.
    • (c) throughout the material part of the said period, the computer or communication device was operating properly or, if not…was not such as to affect the electronic record or the accuracy of its contents;
      • Simple English: The computer or device must have been working correctly. If it was broken for a bit, that breakdown must not have affected the accuracy of your specific file.
      • Example: The bank’s server was “operating properly.” Or, “The CCTV system was working properly at the time of the recording.”
    • (d) the information contained in the electronic record reproduces or is derived from such information fed into the computer or Communication device in the ordinary course of the said activities.
      • Simple English: The final output (the printout/file) must be an accurate reproduction of the data that was originally fed into the system.
      • Example: The printout of the bank statement accurately shows the transaction data that was fed into the server by the bank’s tellers and ATMs.
  • Section 63(3): Where over any period, the function of…storing or processing information…was regularly performed by means of one or more computers or communication device, whether… (a) in standalone mode; or (b) on a computer system; or (c) on a computer network;…all the computers…shall be treated…as constituting a single computer…
  • Simple English: This clarifies that “computer” can mean a whole network. You don’t need to certify every single laptop, router, and server in a complex system. If they all work together (like a company’s network or a cloud system), they can be treated as one single “computer” for the purpose of the certificate.
  • Example: A file is created on a laptop (Computer A), saved to a local server (Computer B), and then backed up to a cloud server (Computer C). For the certificate, this entire network can be treated as a “single computer.”
  • Section 63(4): In any proceeding where it is desired to give a statement in evidence by virtue of this section, a certificate doing any of the following things shall be submitted…
  • Simple English: This is the practical part. To prove the four conditions from 63(2), you must provide a signed certificate (the “63 Certificate,” formerly 65B) that does the following:
    • (a) identifying the electronic record…and describing the manner in which it was produced;
      • Certificate says: “This certificate is for the 3-minute video file named ‘CLIP-001.mp4’ on the attached CD. It was produced by copying it from the main DVR’s hard drive.”
    • (b) giving such particulars of any device involved…as may be appropriate…
      • Certificate says: “The device involved was a ‘SecureEye’ 8-channel DVR, model 5000, serial number XXXXX.”
    • (c) dealing with…the conditions mentioned in sub-section (2)…and purporting to be signed by a person in charge of the computer…or the management of the relevant activities…
      • Certificate says: “I, [Name], as the [IT Manager] in charge of this device, certify that:
        1. The DVR was in regular use.
        2. It regularly records video in the ordinary course of business.
        3. It was operating properly on [Date].
        4. This video file is an accurate reproduction of the data recorded by the DVR.”
      • This certificate is then itself evidence of these facts.
  • Section 63(5): This section provides technical clarifications.
    • (a) information shall be taken to be supplied to a computer…if it is supplied thereto in any appropriate form…
      • Simple English: Data can be “fed” into a computer in any way: by a person typing, by another machine automatically, by a sensor, etc.
    • (b) a computer output shall be taken to have been produced by a computer…whether it was produced by it directly or…by means of any appropriate equipment…
      • Simple English: A “computer output” is valid whether it’s a printout (produced by a printer, which is “appropriate equipment”) or just a file copied to a new device.

Section 64: Rules as to notice to produce.

This section relates back to Section 60(a), which gave the excuse: “The other side has the original, and they won’t give it to me.” This section explains how you legally tell them to produce it.

  • Legal Text: Secondary evidence of the contents of the documents referred to in clause (a) of section 60, shall not be given unless the party…has previously given to the party in whose possession…the document is…such notice to produce it as is prescribed by law…
  • Simple English: You cannot use a copy (secondary evidence) by claiming “the other side has the original” unless you have first given the other side a formal legal notice (a “Notice to Produce”) demanding they bring the original to court, and they have failed to do so.
  • Example: A sues B. A knows B has the original signed contract.
    • Step 1: A’s lawyer sends B’s lawyer a formal “Notice to Produce the original contract at the hearing.”
    • Step 2: At the hearing, the judge asks B for the original. B refuses.
    • Step 3: Only now is A legally allowed to use his photocopy (secondary evidence) because he has laid the foundation.
  • Proviso: Provided that such notice shall not be required in order to render secondary evidence admissible in any of the following cases…
  • Simple English: There are 6 situations where you don’t need to send a formal “Notice to Produce” and can just use your copy.
    • (a) when the document to be proved is itself a notice;
      • Example: You are trying to prove you sent the other side a “Notice of Eviction.” You can just show your copy of the notice; you don’t need to “notice” them to produce the notice.
    • (b) when, from the nature of the case, the adverse party must know that he will be required to produce it;
      • Example: In a lawsuit about a specific contract, it’s obvious the contract is the main point. The other side must know they need to bring it.
    • (c) when it appears…the adverse party has obtained possession of the original by fraud or force;
      • Example: You can prove the other side stole the original document from you. You don’t need to ask them to please produce the thing they stole.
    • (d) when the adverse party or his agent has the original in Court;
      • Example: The other party’s lawyer accidentally reveals he has the original document in his briefcase right now. The judge can just order him to hand it over.
    • (e) when the adverse party or his agent has admitted the loss of the document;
      • Example: The other party has already stated in an email, “We seem to have lost the original contract.” You don’t need to send them a notice to produce something they’ve already admitted is lost.
    • (f) when the person in possession of the document is out of reach of, or not subject to, the process of the Court.
      • Example: The original document is in another country with someone who is not part of this lawsuit. Sending a notice would be useless.

Section 65: Proof of signature and handwriting of person alleged to have signed or written document produced.

  • Legal Text: If a document is alleged to be signed or to have been written…by any person, the signature or the handwriting…must be proved to be in his handwriting.
  • Simple English: It’s not enough to just produce a document; you must also prove who wrote it or signed it. A signature on a document does not prove itself (unless it’s a 30-year-old document, see Sec 92).
  • Example: You produce a promissory note “signed by A.” A claims, “That’s not my signature.” You must now bring additional evidence to prove the signature is A’s. This can be done by:
    1. Expert Opinion (Sec 39): A handwriting expert compares it to A’s known signatures.
    2. Non-Expert Opinion (Sec 41): A’s bank manager (who is “acquainted” with his signature) testifies it looks real.
    3. Direct Evidence (Sec 55): A witness testifies, “I saw A sign that paper.”
    4. Comparison (Sec 72): Asking the judge to compare the signature to A’s signature on his admitted court papers.

Section 66: Proof as to electronic signature.

  • Legal Text: Except in the case of a secure electronic signature, if the electronic signature of any subscriber is alleged to have been affixed…the fact that such electronic signature is the electronic signature of the subscriber must be proved.
  • Simple English: This is the digital version of Section 65. If a document is signed with a standard electronic signature (e.g., a “click to sign” on a website, a scanned image of a signature), you must bring evidence to prove the person “clicked” or applied it.
  • The Exception: This rule does not apply to a “secure electronic signature” (like a high-security DSC token). A secure signature is presumed to be authentic (as we’ll see in Section 86).
  • Example: A sues B based on a contract signed via a “DocuSign” link (a standard e-signature). B claims, “I never clicked that link.” A must now bring proof (e.g., the DocuSign audit trail, an IP address log, or an admission email from B) to show that B was the one who affixed the signature.

Section 67: Proof of execution of document required by law to be attested.

  • Legal Text: If a document is required by law to be attested, it shall not be used as evidence until one attesting witness at least has been called for the purpose of proving its execution, if there be an attesting witness alive, and subject to the process of the Court and capable of giving evidence:
  • Simple English: This is a very strict rule for a special class of documents. “Attested” means it was signed in the presence of witnesses, who then also signed it as witnesses. The main example is a Will.
  • This section says that to prove a document that requires attestation (like a Will), you must put at least one of the original attesting witnesses on the stand to testify, “Yes, I was there, I saw the person sign the will, and then I signed it as a witness.”
  • You must do this even if the other side isn’t denying the Will. It’s a mandatory step.
  • Example: To prove a Will in court, the executor must locate one of the two witnesses who signed the will (e.g., the family friend or lawyer who was present) and have them testify. If they fail to do this, the Will cannot be used as evidence.
  • Proviso: Provided that it shall not be necessary to call an attesting witness in proof of the execution of any document, not being a will, which has been registered…unless its execution…is specifically denied.
  • Simple English: This is an exception for registered documents (but NOT wills). If a document (like a gift deed or mortgage deed) was attested and officially registered with the Sub-Registrar, you don’t need to call the attesting witness, unless the other party specifically denies they signed it.
  • Example: You submit a registered gift deed. You don’t need to call the attesting witness. But, if the other side files a paper saying “That is a forgery, I deny execution,” then you must call the attesting witness, just as if it were a Will.

Section 68: Proof where no attesting witness found.

  • Legal Text: If no such attesting witness can be found, it must be proved that the attestation of one attesting witness at least is in his handwriting, and that the signature of the person executing the document is in the handwriting of that person.
  • Simple English: This is the backup plan for Section 67. What if all the attesting witnesses to the Will are dead, missing, or incapable of testifying?
  • In that case, you must prove two things instead:
    1. Prove the signature of at least one witness (e.g., “This is the signature of Witness X, I knew him”).
    2. Prove the signature of the person who made the will (e.g., “And this is the signature of the testator, Mr. Y”).
  • Example: Both witnesses to a Will are dead. The executor calls the witness’s son to testify (under Sec 41), “Yes, I recognize my father’s signature; that is his.” And he calls the testator’s bank manager to testify (under Sec 41), “Yes, I recognize that signature; that is Mr. Y’s.”

Section 69: Admission of execution by party to attested document.

  • Legal Text: The admission of a party to an attested document of its execution by himself shall be sufficient proof of its execution as against him, though it be a document required by law to be attested.
  • Simple English: If the person who signed the attested document (like the person who made the Will or gift deed) admits in court (“Yes, that’s my signature”), then that admission is sufficient proof against them. You don’t need to call the attesting witness.
  • Example: In a suit about a gift deed, the person who gave the gift admits on the stand, “Yes, I signed that deed.” This admission is enough to prove the deed against him. He cannot later try to get the case dismissed because the attesting witness wasn’t called.

Section 70: Proof when attesting witness denies execution.

  • Legal Text: If the attesting witness denies or does not recollect the execution of the document, its execution may be proved by other evidence.
  • Simple English: This handles a hostile witness scenario. You call the attesting witness to the stand (as required by Sec 67), and they shock you by saying:
    1. “I deny I signed this.”
    2. “I don’t remember this at all.”
  • This section says your case is not automatically dead. You can now go to your other evidence to prove the document.
  • Example: You call the witness to a Will. He denies signing it. You can now disregard his testimony and instead prove the Will another way, such as by:
    1. Calling a handwriting expert (Sec 39) to prove the witness’s signature is real (and he is lying).
    2. Proving it under Section 68 (proving the witness’s signature and the testator’s signature by other means).

Section 71: Proof of document not required by law to be attested.

  • Legal Text: An attested document not required by law to be attested may be proved as if it was unattested.
  • Simple English: This rule deals with documents that have attesting witnesses (people who watched it being signed) even though the law didn’t require them. A good example is a simple contract or a promissory note.
  • The rule is: You can prove this document as if it were never attested. You do not need to call the attesting witness (unlike a Will). You just need to prove the signature of the person who executed it (under Section 65).
  • Example: A and B make a simple loan agreement (which doesn’t require attestation). They sign it, and they have two friends, C and D, also sign as “witnesses” just to be safe. Later, A sues B. A does not need to find and call C or D to court. He just needs to prove B’s signature on the agreement.

Section 72: Comparison of signature, writing or seal with others admitted or proved.

This section gives the court the power to become its own handwriting expert.

  • Section 72(1): In order to ascertain whether a signature, writing or seal is that of the person…any signature, writing, or seal admitted or proved to the satisfaction of the Court to have been written or made by that person may be compared with the one which is to be proved…
  • Simple English: When a document’s signature is disputed, the judge can compare it with another signature from the same person that is admitted or proven to be genuine.
  • Example: A sues B over a cheque. B claims, “That’s not my signature on the cheque” (this is the disputed signature). The judge can then compare the cheque’s signature to B’s signature on his Vakalatnama or court affidavit (which is an admitted signature).
  • Section 72(2): The Court may direct any person present in Court to write any words or figures for the purpose of enabling the Court to compare the words or figures so written with any words or figures alleged to have been written by such person.
  • Simple English: The judge can order anyone present in the courtroom (usually the person who denies signing) to write something down (e.g., “write your name,” “write this sentence”) to create a new, undisputed sample for comparison right then and there.
  • Example: In the same cheque case, the judge hands B a pen and paper and says, “Please write ‘Pay to the order of A’ and sign your name three times.” The judge will then compare this new sample with the disputed cheque signature.
  • Section 72(3): This section applies also, with any necessary modifications, to finger impressions.
  • Simple English: The same rules of comparison apply to fingerprints and thumb impressions.
  • Example: A disputed land deed has a thumbprint. The judge can compare it to a thumbprint admitted by that person on another document or take a fresh thumbprint from them in court for comparison.

Section 73: Proof as to verification of digital signature.

This is the digital equivalent of Section 72: how a court verifies a disputed digital signature (like a DSC).

  • Section 73(a): [The Court may direct] that person or the Controller or the Certifying Authority to produce the Digital Signature Certificate;
  • Simple English: The judge can order the person who allegedly signed, or the Certifying Authority (the company like eMudhra, Sify, etc., that issued the DSC), to produce the Digital Signature Certificate (the “DSC”) itself.
  • Example: A party denies signing a document with their DSC. The judge issues an order to the Certifying Authority: “Produce the Digital Signature Certificate, with its public key, issued to Mr. B.”
  • Section 73(b): [The Court may direct] any other person to apply the public key listed in the Digital Signature Certificate and verify the digital signature purported to have been affixed by that person.
  • Simple English: The judge can order an expert (or “any other person”) to take that “public key” (from the certificate) and run the verification on the disputed document to see if the signature is valid.
  • Example: The judge tells a court-appointed IT expert, “Take the public key from the certificate produced by eMudhra and use it to verify the signature on this PDF.” If the software says “Signature is Valid,” it is proved.

Section 74: Public and private documents.

This section creates two important categories of documents, which have different rules for how they are proved.

  • Section 74(1): The following documents are public documents:-
    • (a) documents forming the acts, or records of the acts— (i) of the sovereign authority; (ii) of official bodies and tribunals; and (iii) of public officers, legislative, judicial and executive…
      • Simple English: This category includes documents created by the government as part of its official work. These are “records of acts.”
      • Example: A court judgment (record of a judicial act), a new law passed by Parliament (record of a legislative act), or a government notification (record of an executive act).
    • (b) public records kept in any State or Union territory of private documents.
      • Simple English: This is the second category. It refers to public records that are kept about private documents. The original document is private, but the government’s record of it is public.
      • Example: You and I sign a sale deed for a house (a private document). We then take it to the Sub-Registrar’s office to be registered. The entry in the Registrar’s book about our deed, and the copy he keeps on file, is a “public record kept of a private document.”
  • Section 74(2): All other documents except the documents referred to in sub-section (1) are private.
  • Simple English: If it’s not in one of the two “public” categories above, it’s a private document.
  • Example: A personal letter, a family photograph, a business contract, a diary, or an un-registered rent agreement.

Section 75: Certified copies of public documents.

This section defines what a “certified copy” is and how to get one.

  • Legal Text: Every public officer having the custody of a public document, which any person has a right to inspect, shall give that person on demand a copy of it on payment of the legal fees…together with a certificate…that it is a true copy…and such certificate shall be dated and subscribed by such officer with his name and his official title, and shall be sealed…
  • Simple English: If a public officer (like a registrar, a court clerk) has a public document you’re allowed to see, you have the right to pay a fee and get a copy. To make it a “certified copy,” the officer must add a note to it that says “True Copy” (or similar), and then sign and date it with their official seal and title.
  • Example: You go to the Municipal Corporation and pay ₹50 to get a copy of a birth certificate (a public document). The clerk gives you a photocopy, stamps it “CERTIFIED TRUE COPY,” and signs it with their title “Registrar, Births & Deaths.” This is now a “Certified Copy.”
  • Explanation: Any officer who, by the ordinary course of official duty, is authorised to deliver such copies, shall be deemed to have the custody…
  • Simple English: The person whose job it is to hand out copies is considered the one with “custody” for the purpose of this rule.

Section 76: Proof of documents by production of certified copies.

  • Legal Text: Such certified copies may be produced in proof of the contents of the public documents or parts of the public documents of which they purport to be copies.
  • Simple English: This is the reason certified copies are so important. It is the exception to the “Best Evidence Rule” (Sec 59). You can use the certified copy (secondary evidence) to prove the contents of a public document. You do not need to produce the original (primary evidence).
  • Example: In a land dispute, you submit the certified copy of the sale deed (which you got from the Registrar under Sec 75). This is sufficient proof. You do not need to ask the Sub-Registrar to bring his giant, original record book to the court.

Section 77: Proof of other official documents.

This section gives specific, alternative ways to prove certain high-level official documents (besides just getting a certified copy).

  • (a) Acts, orders or notifications of the…Government…
    • Simple English: How to prove a government order.
    • How to Prove: By (i) records certified by the head of the department, or (ii) any document printed by order of the Government.
    • Example: The easiest way is to produce the Official Gazette where the notification was published, as it is “printed by order of…Government.”
  • (b) the proceedings of Parliament or a State Legislature…
    • Simple English: How to prove what happened in Parliament.
    • How to Prove: By the official “journals” of that body, or by the published Acts, or by copies printed by government order.
    • Example: To prove a law was passed, you can produce the published Act itself.
  • (c) proclamations, orders or Regulations issued by the President…or Governor…
    • Simple English: How to prove a proclamation from the President or a Governor.
    • How to Prove: By copies or extracts published in the Official Gazette.
    • Example: To prove “President’s Rule” was declared, you produce the Official Gazette containing the proclamation.
  • (d) the Acts…of the Legislature of a foreign country…
    • Simple English: How to prove a foreign law.
    • How to Prove: By the official journal of that country, or a copy certified by that country, or if an Indian law recognizes it.
    • Example: To prove a specific UK law, you produce a copy of the Act certified under the seal of the UK government.
  • (e) the proceedings of a municipal or local body…
    • Simple English: How to prove a local (e.g., city council) rule.
    • How to Prove: By a copy certified by the legal keeper (e.g., the Municipal Commissioner) or a book published by that body’s authority.
    • Example: To prove a new building by-law, you get a certified copy from the Municipal Corporation.
  • (f) public documents of any other class in a foreign country…
    • Simple English: How to prove a foreign public document (like a foreign birth certificate).
    • How to Prove: By the original OR by a certified copy from the keeper of that record, which is then also certified by a Notary Public or an Indian Consul/Diplomat in that country (this is a “chain certification”).
    • Example: To prove a US birth certificate, you need a copy certified by the US county clerk, AND then you must take that copy to the Indian Embassy in the US to have an officer certify the clerk’s signature.

Section 78: Presumption as to genuineness of certified copies.

  • Section 78(1): The Court shall presume to be genuine every document purporting to be a certificate, certified copy or other document, which is by law declared to be admissible…
  • Simple English: This is a “Shall Presume” rule. It means the judge must accept that the certified copy is genuine (a real copy of the original).
  • Proviso: Provided that such document is substantially in the form and purports to be executed in the manner directed by law…
  • Simple English: The presumption only applies if the document looks official and seems to follow the rules (e.g., it has what looks like a real seal and signature).
  • Section 78(2): The Court shall also presume that any officer by whom any such document purports to be signed or certified, held, when he signed it, the official character which he claims in such paper.
  • Simple English: The judge must also assume that the person who signed the certified copy actually held the job they claim to have (e.g., that “S. Sharma” was, in fact, the “Sub-Registrar”).
  • Combined Example: You give the judge a certified copy of a birth certificate (from Sec 75). The judge SHALL PRESUME:
    1. It is a genuine copy of the original birth record.
    2. The person who signed it was the “Registrar, Births & Deaths.”
  • Effect: The burden of proof is now on the other side to prove that the certified copy is a forgery or that the officer was an imposter.

Section 79: Presumption as to documents produced as record of evidence, etc.

  • Legal Text: Whenever any document is produced…purporting to be a record or memorandum of the evidence…or to be a statement or confession…taken in accordance with law, and purporting to be signed by any Judge or Magistrate…the Court shall presume that—
  • Simple English: This is the “Shall Presume” rule for official court/legal records, like a witness’s deposition (testimony) or an accused’s confession recorded by a Magistrate.
  • If a document looks like an official court record and is signed by a Judge or Magistrate, the court must assume the following:
    • (i) the document is genuine;
      • Presumption: This is the real deposition/confession.
    • (ii) any statements as to the circumstances under which it was taken…are true;
      • Presumption: The Magistrate’s note on the document (e.g., “Recorded at 10:00 AM,” “Accused was warned”) is true.
    • (iii) such evidence, statement or confession was duly taken.
      • Presumption: The legal procedure for taking the statement (e.g., administering the oath, ensuring no police were present for a confession) was followed correctly.
  • Example: The prosecution introduces a confession signed by a Magistrate. The trial judge SHALL PRESUME it’s genuine, the notes on it are true, and the procedure was followed. The burden is on the defense to prove that the Magistrate faked it or violated the procedure.

Section 80: Presumption as to Gazettes, newspapers, and other documents.

  • Legal Text: The Court shall presume the genuineness of every document purporting to be the Official Gazette, or to be a newspaper or journal, and of every document purporting to be a document directed by any law to be kept by any person, if such document is kept substantially in the form required by law and is produced from proper custody.
  • Simple English: This is another “Shall Presume” rule. The court must assume the genuineness of:
    1. The Official Gazette: The official government publication.
    2. Newspapers and Journals: Any document that looks like a newspaper.
    3. Other Official Records: Any other document a law requires someone to keep (e.g., a company’s register of members), if it comes from “proper custody.”
  • Example (Newspaper): A party submits a copy of “The Times of India” from Jan 1, 2020. The judge shall presume it is a genuine copy of that newspaper.
  • Important Note: This presumption applies to the document itself, not the truth of its contents. The judge presumes it’s a real newspaper, but not that the article printed in it is true.
  • Explanation: …document is said to be in proper custody if it is in the place in which, and looked after by the person with whom such document is required to be kept…
  • Simple English: “Proper custody” means the document comes from its logical and legal home.
  • Example: A company’s
    “Register of Directors” (a document required by law to be kept) produced from the Company Secretary’s office is from “proper custody.” The same document produced from a stranger’s house is not.

Section 81: Presumption as to Gazettes in electronic or digital record.

  • Legal Text: The Court shall presume the genuineness of every electronic or digital record purporting to be the Official Gazette, or purporting to be electronic or digital record directed by any law to be kept by any person, if such electronic or digital record is kept substantially in the form required by law and is produced from proper custody.
  • Simple English: This is a “Shall Presume” rule and is the digital-age version of Section 80. The court must assume the genuineness of:
    1. An electronic Official Gazette (e.g., the PDF downloaded from the official government site).
    2. Any other electronic record that a law requires a person to keep (e.g., a company’s digital Register of Members).
  • Condition: This only applies if the record looks to be in the proper format and is produced from “proper custody.”
  • Example: A lawyer needs to prove a new government regulation. She submits a PDF of the notification that she downloaded directly from the official e-Gazette website. The judge shall presume this PDF is the genuine, authentic government notification.
  • Explanation: For the purposes of this section…electronic records are said to be in proper custody if they are in the place in which, and looked after by the person with whom such document is required to be kept…
  • Simple English (Explanation): “Proper custody” for a digital file means it comes from its logical and legal home.
  • Example (Explanation): A company’s digital accounts, when produced from the company’s official accounting server managed by the CFO, are from “proper custody.” The same files found on a former employee’s personal laptop are not.

Section 82: Presumption as to maps or plans made by authority of Government.

  • Legal Text: The Court shall presume that maps or plans purporting to be made by the authority of the Central Government or any State Government were so made, and are accurate; but maps or plans made for the purposes of any cause must be proved to be accurate.
  • Simple English: This is a “Shall Presume” rule for official government maps. The court must assume that any map or plan that looks like it was made by the government (e.g., a city development plan, a Survey of India map) is:
    1. Genuinely made by the government.
    2. Accurate.
  • The Exception: This presumption does not apply to a map or plan that was made specifically for the current lawsuit (a “cause”). That map must be proved to be accurate (e.g., by calling the surveyor who drew it to testify).
  • Example 1 (Presumed Accurate): In a property line dispute, a party submits the official District Zoning Map published by the State government in 2020. The judge shall presume this map is accurate.
  • Example 2 (Must Be Proved): The other party submits a new survey sketch they paid a private surveyor to create last week just for the trial. The judge will not presume this is accurate. The party must call the surveyor to the stand to prove it.

Section 83: Presumption as to collections of laws and reports of decisions.

  • Legal Text: The Court shall presume the genuineness of, every book purporting to be printed or published under the authority of the Government of any country, and to contain any of the laws of that country, and of every book purporting to contain reports of decisions of the Courts of such country.
  • Simple English: This is a “Shall Presume” rule. The court must assume the genuineness of two types of books:
    1. Any book that looks like it’s an official government publication containing that country’s laws.
    2. Any book that looks like it’s a “law reporter” containing court case decisions (e.g., Supreme Court Reports, All India Reporter).
  • Example: A lawyer cites a case from a book titled “Supreme Court Cases (SCC).” The judge shall presume this is a genuine book containing real court decisions. The lawyer does not need to prove that the book itself is authentic.

Section 84: Presumption as to powers-of-attorney.

  • Legal Text: The Court shall presume that every document purporting to be a power-of-attorney, and to have been executed before, and authenticated by, a Notary Public, or any Court, Judge, Magistrate, Indian Consul or Vice-Consul, or representative of the Central Government, was so executed and authenticated.
  • Simple English: This is a very important “Shall Presume” rule. If a Power-of-Attorney (PoA) document looks like it was signed in front of and authenticated (stamped and sealed) by one of these officials (especially a Notary Public), the court must assume it was properly signed and is authentic.
  • This rule makes it much easier to use a PoA in court, as the burden of proof shifts.
  • Example: A woman living in Canada wants her brother in India to manage her property. She signs a PoA in Canada in front of a Notary Public. When her brother submits this notarized PoA to an Indian court, the judge shall presume it is genuine. The other side would have to prove it is a forgery.

Section 85: Presumption as to electronic agreements.

  • Legal Text: The Court shall presume that every electronic record purporting to be an agreement containing the electronic or digital signature of the parties was so concluded by affixing the electronic or digital signature of the parties.
  • Simple English: This is a “Shall Presume” rule and is the digital equivalent of Section 84. The court must assume that an electronic agreement (like a PDF contract) that has electronic signatures on it was validly concluded by those parties.
  • Example: Two companies enter into a supply agreement. Instead of printing it, they both sign the PDF using their Digital Signature Certificates (DSCs). When this file is presented in court, the judge shall presume it’s a validly concluded agreement.

Section 86: Presumption as to electronic records and electronic signatures.

  • Section 86(1): In any proceeding involving a secure electronic record, the Court shall presume unless contrary is proved, that the secure electronic record has not been altered since the specific point of time to which the secure status relates.
  • Simple English: This is a “Shall Presume” rule that only applies to “secure” electronic records (a high-security technical standard). The court must assume that such a record has not been tampered with since it was secured.
  • Example: A document is time-stamped and sealed using a “secure” encryption method. The judge shall presume its contents are the same as they were at the moment of sealing.
  • Section 86(2): In any proceeding, involving secure electronic signature, the Court shall presume unless the contrary is proved that— (a) the secure electronic signature is affixed by subscriber with the intention of signing or approving the electronic record; (b) except in the case of a secure electronic record or a secure electronic signature, nothing in this section shall create any presumption, relating to authenticity and integrity of the electronic record or any electronic signature.
  • Simple English: This part is crucial:
    • (a) For a “secure” signature (like a high-grade DSC token), the court must assume the owner of that signature affixed it on purpose.
    • (b) This is the most important part: For any other (i.e., non-secure) electronic record or signature (like a typed name in an email, a scanned signature image, a simple “click to sign”), this section provides NO PRESUMPTION at all.
  • Example 1 (Secure): A director signs a company filing using his DSC Token. The court shall presume he signed it intentionally and that it’s authentic.
  • Example 2 (Non-Secure): A party relies on a simple email with a typed name at the bottom. The court makes no presumption. The party must prove who sent the email and that it’s genuine (using the rules in Section 63).

Section 87: Presumption as to Electronic Signature Certificates.

  • Legal Text: The Court shall presume, unless contrary is proved, that the information listed in an Electronic Signature Certificate is correct, except for information specified as subscriber information which has not been verified, if the certificate was accepted by the subscriber.
  • Simple English: This is a “Shall Presume” rule. The court must assume that the information contained within a Digital Signature Certificate (the file that proves who you are) is correct.
  • The Exception: …unless the certificate itself says a piece of information wasn’t verified (e.g., “Subscriber’s phone number: unverified”).
  • Example: A DSC Certificate lists the person’s name as “Rohan Gupta” and their company as “ABC Exports.” The judge shall presume this information is correct. The burden is on the other side to prove he is not Rohan Gupta or doesn’t work for ABC Exports.

Section 88: Presumption as to certified copies of foreign judicial records.

  • Section 88(1): The Court may presume that any document purporting to be a certified copy of any judicial record of any country beyond India is genuine and accurate, if the document purports to be certified in any manner which is certified by any representative of the Central Government in or for such country to be the manner commonly in use…
  • Simple English: This is a “May Presume” rule (the judge can, but doesn’t have to). The judge may assume that a certified copy of a foreign court’s judgment (e.g., a US divorce decree, a UK commercial judgment) is genuine.
  • The Condition: The presumption only applies if the document has a “chain certification.” This means:
    1. It is certified by the foreign court.
    2. It is then certified by an Indian diplomat (from an Indian Embassy or Consulate) in that country, who states, “Yes, this is the correct way they certify documents here.”
  • Section 88(2): An officer who, with respect to any territory or place outside India is a Political Agent…shall…be deemed to be a representative of the Central Government…
  • Simple English: This just clarifies who qualifies as a “representative of the Central Government” (e.g., an Indian Consul).
  • Example: To prove a divorce in a US court, you get a copy certified by the US court clerk. You then take that copy to the Indian Consulate in New York, where an Indian Consular Officer adds another stamp and signature certifying the clerk’s authority. An Indian judge may now presume the US decree is genuine.

Section 89: Presumption as to books, maps and charts.

  • Legal Text: The Court may presume that any book to which it may refer for information on matters of public or general interest, and that any published map or chart, the statements of which are relevant facts, and which is produced for its inspection, was written and published by the person, and at the time and place, by whom or at which it purports to be written or published.
  • Simple English: This is a “May Presume” rule for non-official publications of public interest. The judge may assume that a book (like a medical textbook, a historical encyclopedia) or a published map (like a commercial atlas) is genuine.
  • This presumption is weaker than Section 83 (for government books) or Section 82 (for government maps).
  • Example: In a medical malpractice case, a lawyer quotes from the 20th edition of “Harrison’s Principles of Internal Medicine.” The judge may presume this book is, in fact, the genuine medical textbook it claims to be, written by the listed authors.

Section 90: Presumption as to electronic messages.

  • Legal Text: The Court may presume that an electronic message, forwarded by the originator through an electronic mail server to the addressee to whom the message purports to be addressed corresponds with the message as fed into his computer for transmission; but the Court shall not make any presumption as to the person by whom such message was sent.
  • Simple English: This is a “May Presume” rule for electronic messages (like emails).
  • What the Court May Presume: The judge may assume that the message received is an accurate, unaltered copy of the message that was sent. It presumes the integrity of the transmission.
  • What the Court Shall Not Presume: The judge will not make any presumption about who sent the message.
  • Example: The prosecution introduces a printout of an email received by a witness. The email is from “hacker@proton.me” and contains a threat.
    • The judge may presume that the email received by the witness is the exact same message that the person at “hacker@proton.me” sent.
    • The judge shall not presume that the accused is the person who owns or sent the email from “hacker@proton.me”. The prosecution must prove that part separately.

Section 91: Presumption as to due execution, etc., of documents not produced.

  • Legal Text: The Court shall presume that every document, called for and not produced after notice to produce, was attested, stamped and executed in the manner required by law.
  • Simple English: This is a “Shall Presume” rule that acts as a penalty. If you give the other side a formal “Notice to Produce” (under Sec 64) for a document, and they refuse to produce it, the court must assume that the document (which you can now prove with a copy) was perfectly valid.
  • The court will assume it was properly attested (witnessed), stamped (paid the proper stamp duty), and executed (signed).
  • Example: A sues B on a contract. A gives B a “Notice to Produce” the original contract. B refuses. A now uses a photocopy (secondary evidence). B’s lawyer tries to argue, “That contract is invalid anyway because it wasn’t properly stamped!”
    • Because B refused to produce the original, the judge shall presume the original was properly stamped. B is not allowed to make this argument.

Section 92: Presumption as to documents thirty years old.

  • Legal Text: Where any document, purporting or proved to be thirty years old, is produced from any custody which the Court in the particular case considers proper, the Court may presume that the signature and every other part of such document…is in that person’s handwriting, and, in the case of a document executed or attested, that it was duly executed and attested…
  • Simple English: This is the “Ancient Document Rule”. It is a “May Presume” rule (the judge has the option).
  • If a document is 30 years old or more, and it comes from “proper custody” (a logical, trustworthy place), the judge may assume:
    1. The signature is genuine.
    2. The handwriting is genuine.
    3. If it was witnessed (attested), it was done correctly.
  • This rule exists because it’s often impossible to find witnesses or signature proof for a document from 1950.
  • Explanation: (Explanation to section 80 applies) “Proper custody” means its logical and legal home.
  • Example (Illustration a): A family has lived on a piece of land for 50 years. They produce a sale deed from 1970 from their family safe. The safe is “proper custody.” The judge may presume the signatures on the 1970 deed are genuine.
  • Example (Illustration b): A is the mortgagee of a property (he gave the loan). He produces the 40-year-old mortgage deeds. The mortgagor (who took the loan) is living on the land. The mortgagee’s custody of the deeds is “proper custody.”
  • Example (Illustration c): B’s son produces land deeds for B’s land, which B had given him for safekeeping. This is also “proper custody.”

Section 93: Presumption as to electronic records five years old.

  • Legal Text: Where any electronic record, purporting or proved to be five years old, is produced from any custody which the Court in the particular case considers proper, the Court may presume that the electronic signature which purports to be the electronic signature of any particular person was so affixed by him or any person authorised by him in this behalf.
  • Simple English: This is the new, digital version of the “Ancient Document Rule.” It is a “May Presume” rule.
  • If an electronic record is 5 years old or more, and it comes from “proper custody” (e.g., a company’s archived server, a lawyer’s official digital archive), the judge may assume that the electronic signature on it is genuine and was affixed by the person who it belongs to.
  • Explanation: (Explanation to section 81 applies) “Proper custody” for digital files means its logical and legal home (e.g., the official server, not a random pen drive).
  • Example: A company is in a dispute over a contract digitally signed in 2018. It produces the file from its official, archived contract server. The judge may presume the digital signature from 2018 is genuine.

Related Posts