Section 60: Cases in Which Secondary Evidence Relating to Documents May Be Given

Overview

Section 60 of the Bhartiya Sakshya Bill, 2023, deals with situations where you can present a *copy* of a document in court instead of the original. Generally, courts prefer the original. However, this section outlines specific circumstances where a copy (secondary evidence) is allowed if the original is unavailable. It’s about ensuring justice isn’t hindered simply because the original document is missing.

Key Principles / Ingredients

• Type of Evidence: This section primarily concerns documentary evidence – written documents, records, and now, importantly, electronic records (emails, messages, data). It doesn’t directly cover oral testimony, though secondary evidence *about* oral statements might be relevant elsewhere.
• Conditions for Admissibility: Secondary evidence is admissible only when the court is satisfied about specific conditions. These include: (1) the original document has been lost or destroyed; (2) the original is in the possession of the opposing party who refuses to produce it; (3) the original is so voluminous or complex that it’s not reasonably movable to court; or (4) other circumstances justifying the use of a copy.
• Burden of Proof: The party presenting secondary evidence has the burden of proving that one of the conditions for its admissibility has been met. They must convince the court *why* the original isn’t available. Simply saying it’s ‘difficult to find’ isn’t enough.

How Courts Use this Provision

Judges carefully scrutinize requests to admit secondary evidence. They’ll ask questions to determine if a genuine effort was made to locate the original. The court will consider the reasons for the original’s unavailability and whether the copy presented is a reliable reproduction. The opposing party will have a chance to challenge the admissibility of the secondary evidence.

Illustrations and Examples

• Example 1 – Lost Document: A plaintiff wants to prove a loan agreement. The original agreement was lost in a house fire. They can present a photocopy of the agreement, along with evidence of the fire (e.g., a fire department report), to justify using secondary evidence.
• Example 2 – Opposing Party’s Possession: A defendant is accused of forging a will. The original will is in the possession of the defendant, who refuses to hand it over. The plaintiff can request the court to allow a photocopy of the will to be admitted as evidence, arguing the defendant’s refusal implies something is amiss. The court may even order the defendant to produce the original.

Important Provisos / Explanations

The Bill doesn’t have specific provisos or explanations attached to Section 60. However, the court retains the discretion to determine the reliability and authenticity of the secondary evidence presented. The court can also request further proof or examination of the copy.

Difference from Old Evidence Act (if applicable)

The Bhartiya Sakshya Bill, 2023, largely retains the core principles of Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, regarding secondary evidence. A key shift is the explicit inclusion and emphasis on electronic records as a form of documentary evidence, reflecting modern realities. The new Bill aims for greater clarity and streamlined procedures for dealing with digital evidence.

Key Takeaways

• Original documents are always preferred in court.
• Section 60 allows copies (secondary evidence) only in specific, justified circumstances.
• The party presenting secondary evidence must prove the original’s unavailability.
• Electronic records are now explicitly covered under documentary evidence.
• Courts have discretion to assess the reliability of secondary evidence.