Will photocopy of evidence be accepted as valid evidence?

963 votes

As per the conjoint reading of Sections 64 and 65 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (IEA) photocopies of original documents can be admissible as secondary evidence under certain circumstances.
According to Section 65 IEA, secondary evidence may be given for the existence, condition, or contents of an original document where -

1. The original is shown or appears to be in the possession or power of the person against whom the document is sought to be proved, or of any person out of reach of, or not subject to, the process of the Court, or of any person legally bound to produce it, and when, after the notice mentioned in Section 66 IEA, such person does not produce it.

2. The original has been destroyed or lost, or when the party offering evidence of its contents cannot, for any other reason not arising from his own default or neglect, produce it in a reasonable time.

3. The original is of such a nature as not to be easily movable.

It must be borne in mind that the admissibility of photocopies as evidence will depend on various factors, including the authenticity of the document, the circumstances under which the photocopy was made, and whether it is a true and accurate reproduction of the original document. The court will evaluate the authenticity and credibility of the photocopy before deciding to rely on it for the purpose of adjudicating the issue before it.

Some of the Supreme Court judgements on the production of photocopy evidence are -

a) J. Yashoda v. K. Shobha Rani AIR 2007 SC 1721
In this case the SC held that where there was no possibility of documents being compared with originals were with another person, the documents could not be accepted as secondary evidence.

b) Nawab Singh v. Inderjit Singh Kaur AIR 1999 SC 1668
In this case, the tenant had alleged that the original rent note was in possession of the landlord. The leave sought by the tenant for the production of a copy of the rent note was rejected on the ground that the note sought to be produced was of doubtful veracity. It was held by the SC that the rejection of the application of the tenant without affording him an opportunity of adducing secondary evidence was unjustified.

c) Dhanpat Vs. Sheo Ram (Deceased) Through Lrs. & Ors. Civil Appeal No.1960 of 2020
In this case, the Supreme Court dealt with the requirement of filing an application to produce secondary evidence under Section 65(c) of the Evidence Act. It ruled that there is no such requirement, and the court cannot reject the secondary evidence merely because an application seeking permission to produce it was not filed.

d) Aher Rama Gova & Ors. v.State of Gujarat (1979) 4 SCC 500
In this case, the original dying declaration recorded by the Magistrate was lost and unavailable, and the prosecution presented a copy of the declaration as secondary evidence along with statements from the Magistrate and Head Constable. The Supreme Court allowed the secondary evidence to be presented because there was no dispute between the parties regarding its admissibility, and a proper foundation was laid to establish the right to adduce secondary evidence.

Advocate Sudershani Ray LawRato

922 votes

No.

Section 61 of the Evidence Act prescribes that the contents of a document may be proved either by primary evidence or by secondary evidence. According to Section 62 thereof primary evidence means the document itself produced for the inspection of the Court. Explanation 2 to Section 60 provides that copies of a common original are not primary evidence.

Thus, the photocopy cannot be a primary evidence. As such, it cannot be classified as document. Now let us see whether it can come within the definition of secondary evidence. For secondary evidence, the testimony must indicate that the alleged photocopy was prepared from the original or that it was not prepared from a copy of the original, or that it was compared with (he original if prepared from a copy compared with the original. In the absence of any material, it cannot be treated to be a secondary evidence. It is only orally being claimed to be a photocopy without claiming that what was photographed was the original or that it was compared with the original. So, the photocopy to be admissible as evidence has to be a certified copy. No reliance can be expected on a document which is otherwise inadmissible in a Court and. that whenever "document" is referred in an order or is required to be produced, it must satisfy the test of admissible documents viz. original or secondary as provided in Sections 64, 65 and 66 of the Evidence Act. Further, the Supreme Court of India in J. Yashoda Vs. K. Shobha Rani, AIR 2007 SC 1721 : has held that secondary evidence admissible only in the absence of primary evidence when proper explanation of its absence is given.

Advocate Tahir Ashraf Siddiqui LawRato

909 votes

Photocopies are secondry evidence. The primary evidence is the original copy which is admissible in evidence. However if the party states that the original is lost or is in possession of the opposite party and gives notice to produce the original, photocopy may be admitted. However you may raise objection on the admissibility of the same at initial stage itself. If you don't raise then it will be admitted. You may call to discuss further.

Advocate Anand Kumar LawRato

584 votes

Hi, the witness may produce photocopy of documents in evidence and the same may be accepted by court also provided the originals are also available and the same are proved/compared. You may ask the witness to produce original and rebut the validity of documents. Thanks

Advocate Ganesh Singh LawRato

247 votes

The admissibility of photocopy evidence in a court of law depends on various factors and is subject to certain conditions. Explained below are the general principles surrounding the acceptance of photocopies as evidence:

1. Secondary Evidence Rules: Photocopies are considered secondary evidence because they are copies of the original documents. In general, under the Indian Evidence Act, primary evidence (the original document itself) is preferred over secondary evidence. However, secondary evidence can be accepted in certain circumstances.
2. Circumstances for Secondary Evidence: There are specific circumstances outlined in the Indian Evidence Act where secondary evidence relating to documents may be given. These include situations where the original document is:
   • Lost or destroyed
   • In possession of the opposite party
   • When the original document is of such a nature that it cannot be easily moved
   • When the original document is a public document and a certified copy is available
3. Authentication of Photocopies: To admit a photocopy as secondary evidence, it must be properly authenticated. This usually involves verifying that the photocopy is a true and accurate reproduction of the original document. This can be done through witness testimony or other means.
4. Supreme Court Judgement: The Supreme Court of India has addressed the issue of the admissibility of photocopy evidence in various cases. The admissibility of photocopies as evidence may depend on the specific facts and circumstances of each case, and Supreme Court judgments may provide guidance in interpreting these issues.
5. Expert Opinion: Sometimes, the court may require an expert opinion to confirm the authenticity of the photocopy, especially if there are concerns about alterations or tampering.
6. Weight of Evidence: Even if a photocopy is admitted as evidence, the weight or probative value of that evidence may be assessed by the court. The court will consider factors such as the credibility of the source and the reliability of the photocopy.

In summary, photocopies can be admitted as secondary evidence in court under specific circumstances, as outlined in the Indian Evidence Act. The admissibility and weight of such evidence depend on various factors and may be influenced by relevant Supreme Court judgments. It's essential to consult with legal professionals who can provide guidance specific to your case and jurisdiction.

Advocate Chikirsha Mohanty LawRato