Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023
Section 79
Presumption as to documents produced as record of evidence, etc
Whenever any document is produced before any Court, purporting to be a record or memorandum of the evidence, or of any part of the evidence, given by a witness in a judicial proceeding or before any officer authorised by law to take such evidence or to be a statement or confession by any prisoner or accused person, taken in accordance with law, and purporting to be signed by any Judge or Magistrate, or by any such officer as aforesaid, the Court shall presume that—
(i) the document is genuine;
(ii) any statements as to the circumstances under which it was taken, purporting to be made by the person signing it, are true; and
(iii) such evidence, statement or confession was duly taken.
Why this exists
This provision descends from Section 80 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, drafted to save courts time and effort by trusting official records made by judges, magistrates, or authorized officers in the course of their duties. Without such a presumption, every recorded statement or confession would need fresh proof of authenticity each time it was produced, which would be impractical given how often such records are relied upon in later proceedings (like appeals, retrials, or connected cases). The presumption balances judicial efficiency with fairness, since it is rebuttable—meaning a party can still challenge the document's genuineness or the truth of the circumstances if they have real grounds to do so.
How courts read it
Courts applying the equivalent provision under the 1872 Act have generally held that this presumption is not automatic proof beyond challenge—it only shifts the initial burden, so a party alleging that the document is fake, altered, or improperly recorded can still lead evidence to rebut the presumption. Courts have also emphasized that the presumption applies strictly to documents that meet the description in the section (proper signature, proper authority, and purporting to record evidence or a confession in a judicial or authorized proceeding); if these formal conditions are not met, the presumption does not arise and ordinary rules of proof apply.
Common misconceptions
- Myth: Once a document has this presumption, it can never be challenged in court.
Fact: The presumption is rebuttable—a party can still present evidence to show the document is fake, altered, or was not properly recorded. - Myth: This section applies to any document signed by an officer, even informal notes.
Fact: It applies only to documents that purport to be an official record of evidence, or a statement/confession taken in accordance with law, signed by a judge, magistrate, or specifically authorized officer.