Photostat copy of a document is not admissible as secondary evidence unless proved to be genuine or is admitted by opposite party.

Punjab & Haryana High Court: Following the Supreme Court judgment in Ashok Duli Chand v. Madhavlal Dube, 1975(4) SCC 664, the Court held that the rule which is the most universal, namely the best evidence that the nature of the case will admit shall be produced, decides this objection that, so long as the higher or superior evidence is within a person’s possession or may be reached by him, he shall give no inferior proof in relation to it. It was said that Section 65 of the Evidence Act, 1872 deals with the proof of the contents of the documents tendered in evidence. It permits secondary evidence to be given of the existence, condition or contents of documents under the circumstances mentioned. Hence, secondary evidence of the contents of a document cannot be admitted without non-production of the original being first accounted for in such a manner as to bring it within one or other of the cases provided for in the section.


In the present case during the pendency of suit, the petitioner filed an application for leading secondary evidence to prove photostat copy of alleged agreement executed by predecessor-in-interest of the respondents in his favor. The Court held that before being admitted as secondary evidence, the evidence being copies prepared by mechanical process, the authenticity of the photostat document has to be established. Where photostat copy of a document is produced and there is no proof of its accuracy or of its having been compared with or its being true reproduction of the original, it cannot be considered as secondary evidence. In other words, photostat copy of a document is not admissible as secondary evidence unless proved to be genuine or is admitted by opposite party. [Jawahar Lal v. Surinder Singh, CR. No. 6 of 2012, decided on November 11, 2013]

Print Page