Section 63: Proof of Documents by Production of Copies Compared with Original

Overview

Section 63 of the Bhartiya Sakshya Bill, 2023, deals with how copies of documents can be used as evidence in court. It allows a copy to be accepted *if* it’s proven to be a true and accurate reproduction of the original document. Essentially, you don’t always need the original document itself; a verified copy can often suffice.

Key Principles / Ingredients

• Type of Evidence: This section specifically concerns documentary evidence – written documents, agreements, letters, etc. It also extends to electronic records, treating them similarly to physical documents.
• Conditions for Admissibility: The copy must be compared to the original. This comparison is usually done by a court official or a designated officer. The person making the comparison must certify that the copy is a true likeness of the original. The original document *must* be available for comparison at some point, though not necessarily throughout the entire trial.
• Burden of Proof: The party presenting the copy has the burden of proof to demonstrate that the copy has been properly compared to the original and is an accurate representation. This means they need to show the court the original (at least for comparison) and the certification of the comparison.

How Courts Use this Provision

Judges frequently use Section 63 when the original document is lost, damaged, or difficult to produce (e.g., a very large document or one held by a foreign entity). The court will typically require a formal process of comparison, often involving a court commissioner or officer. The court will then decide if the copy is admissible based on the certification and any objections raised by the opposing party.

Illustrations and Examples

• Example 1 – Simple Situation: A bank loan agreement’s original is held securely in the bank’s vault. To present it in court, the bank can produce a certified copy, comparing it to the original in the presence of a court official. The official certifies the copy’s accuracy, and the court accepts it as evidence.
• Example 2 – More Complex Situation: A company is involved in a contract dispute. The original contract is digitally stored. The company presents a printed copy. The opposing party argues the copy could have been altered. The court may require the company to produce the original digital file for comparison, potentially using forensic techniques to verify its authenticity.

Important Provisos / Explanations

The Bill doesn’t include specific provisos or explanations attached directly to Section 63. However, the general principles of the Bill regarding electronic records and authentication apply. The court retains the discretion to determine the reliability of the comparison process and the authenticity of the copy.

Difference from Old Evidence Act (if applicable)

The Bhartiya Sakshya Bill, 2023, largely retains the core principles of Section 63 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. However, the new Bill provides clearer provisions for the admissibility of electronic records, treating them on par with physical documents for the purpose of comparison and proof. This reflects the increasing prevalence of digital documentation.

Key Takeaways

• Copies of documents can be used as evidence.
• A comparison with the original is crucial.
• The party presenting the copy bears the burden of proving its accuracy.
• Electronic records are treated similarly to physical documents.
• The court has the final say on admissibility.