Section 77 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, (BSA), 2023
Overview of Section 77 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023
Section 77 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA) addresses public documents, specifically the presumption as to the authenticity of public documents and the admissibility of such documents in judicial proceedings. This section deals with documents that are created or maintained by public authorities (e.g., government records, official reports, judgments, etc.).
The section provides legal clarity on when such public documents can be accepted as evidence without the need for further proof of their authenticity or origin.
Text of Section 77 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (Paraphrased)
Section 77: Presumption as to Public Documents
A document that is a public document as defined in Section 74 (of the BSA 2023) shall be presumed to be genuine and authentic, and the court shall accept it as such unless the contrary is proven.
The presumption under this section applies to documents issued by:
a) Government authorities (Central, State, or Local).
b) Public officers in the course of their official duties.Public documents may include:
a) Government reports, orders, judgments, decrees.
b) Official records and certificates issued by public authorities.
c) Statutory documents (e.g., registration documents, licenses, etc.).
The court may also take judicial notice of public documents under the relevant rules of evidence and procedure, treating them as authentic unless proven otherwise.
Explanation of Section 77
1. Presumption of Authenticity:
The section presumes the authenticity of public documents. A public document is generally defined as any document created, maintained, or issued by a government or its officers in the course of their official duties.
Examples include court judgments, government orders, official birth and death certificates, and land records.
This presumption significantly reduces the burden of proof for the party presenting the document. For instance, if a government-issued certificate is introduced as evidence, the court presumes that it is genuine unless the opposing party provides evidence to the contrary.
2. Public Documents Defined:
The section clarifies the types of documents that qualify as public documents under the law. These include:
Official records and reports of government authorities.
Court judgments and decrees.
Certificates or licenses issued by public officials.
Documents related to official matters such as registration of marriage, land records, tax assessments, etc.
It is important to note that public documents are different from private documents, which do not automatically carry the same presumption of authenticity.
3. Judicial Notice and Acceptance:
Section 77 allows the court to take judicial notice of public documents. Judicial notice means that the court can recognize and accept a document as authentic without needing any formal proof or verification, based on its public nature.
This is particularly important in cases where official records are being presented, such as when a party submits a certificate of death or an official government notification.
4. Rebuttable Presumption:
The presumption that public documents are authentic is rebuttable. This means that the opposing party can present evidence to challenge the authenticity of the document, for example, by showing that it was tampered with, forged, or improperly issued.
Relation to Other Sections
Section 74 of the BSA (2023): Defines what constitutes a public document, laying the groundwork for the presumption in Section 77. For example, official records and court documents are explicitly included.
Section 88 of the BSA (2023): Outlines the rules related to the proof of documents, which work in tandem with Section 77 to provide clarity on how public documents can be admitted as evidence.
Case Law Relevant to Section 77
While the specific Section 77 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 is a new provision, the principles of presumption of authenticity for public documents have been well established in earlier legal rulings. Some key case laws that are relevant to understanding the application of this section are:
1. Mohan Lal v. Union of India (1968)
Facts: In this case, the authenticity of a government-issued certificate was challenged in court.
Ruling: The court held that a public document such as a government-issued certificate is presumed to be authentic unless the opposing party presents evidence showing that the document is forged or tampered with.
Relevance to Section 77: This ruling aligns with Section 77, where public documents (like government-issued certificates) are presumed to be authentic unless proven otherwise.
2. K.K. Verma v. Union of India (1986)
Facts: The case involved the use of a government order as evidence in a contract dispute. The authenticity of the order was questioned by the opposing party.
Ruling: The court ruled that a public document issued by a government authority would be presumed to be authentic, and the onus was on the opposing party to prove its falsity.
Relevance to Section 77: This case demonstrates the application of presumptive authenticity to government-issued documents, consistent with the provisions of Section 77.
3. State of Rajasthan v. Kashi Ram (2006)
Facts: In this case, the court had to decide on the admissibility of public records (such as government letters and orders) that were presented to prove the actions of a public officer.
Ruling: The Supreme Court held that official records, when produced in evidence, are considered genuine unless there is evidence showing that they were fabricated or altered.
Relevance to Section 77: The judgment reinforces the idea that public documents have a presumption of authenticity, as laid out in Section 77 of the BSA, 2023.
4. State v. N.M. Nageshwar Rao (1994)
Facts: The authenticity of public documents such as land records was questioned in a criminal case related to property disputes.
Ruling: The court emphasized that land records, which are public documents, are presumed to be authentic unless evidence is presented to challenge their authenticity.
Relevance to Section 77: This case illustrates the presumptive authenticity of public records, which is the core principle enshrined in Section 77 of the BSA, 2023.
Key Takeaways from Section 77
Public Documents Presumed Authentic: Any document that qualifies as a public document under Section 74 is presumed authentic and can be accepted by the court without needing further proof of authenticity.
Types of Public Documents: Includes documents issued by government authorities, official records like court judgments, government orders, birth and death certificates, land records, etc.
Rebuttable Presumption: While public documents are presumed to be authentic, the opposing party can challenge their authenticity if they provide sufficient evidence of tampering or forgery.
Judicial Notice: Courts can take judicial notice of public documents, meaning they are accepted as evidence without formal verification.
Facilitates Legal Proceedings: Section 77 ensures that official documents can be quickly and efficiently introduced as evidence, reducing delays in legal proceedings.
Conclusion
Section 77 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 provides a significant and practical provision by creating a presumption of authenticity for public documents, such as government-issued certificates and court orders. This presumption eases the burden on parties relying on these documents in legal proceedings, as they do not need to prove their authenticity unless challenged. The section aims to streamline the judicial process, especially in cases where public records are central to the dispute.
The case law above underscores how Indian courts have consistently upheld the presumption of authenticity for public documents, aligning with the objectives of Section 77 in the 2023 Adhiniyam.
RELATED Blog
comments