Certified copies of public documents establish the contents of the original documents, but not the truth of the contents. The truth of the contents must be separately established.

Headnote:
EVIDENCE ACT - CERTIFIED COPIES - TRUTH OF CONTENTS - COMPANIES ACT - ANNUAL RETURN - PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE - [SECTION 3, 59, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 67, 74, 76, 77, 79, 83, 114, 159, 164] - Certified copies of public documents are admissible as secondary evidence to prove the contents of the original document, but they do not establish the truth or accuracy of the contents. The truth of the contents must be separately established. However, an annual return filed by a company under section 159 of the Companies Act is prima facie evidence of any matters directed or authorized to be inserted therein by the Act.
Fact of the Case:

In a case involving the admissibility of certified copies of a return of allotments and an annual return filed by a company with the Registrar of Companies, the court was tasked with determining whether the truth of the contents of these documents was established prima facie by their certification under section 610 of the Companies Act.
Finding of the Court:

The court held that certified copies of public documents, including the return of allotments and annual return in question, are admissible as secondary evidence to prove the contents of the original documents. However, the court clarified that such certified copies do not establish the truth or accuracy of the contents. The truth of the contents must be separately established through other means, such as the testimony of witnesses or the production of additional evidence.
Issues: 1. Whether certified copies of public documents establish the truth of their contents prima facie? 2. Whether an annual return filed by a company under section 159 of the Companies Act is prima facie evidence of the matters directed or authorized to be inserted therein?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court interpreted the relevant provisions of the Evidence Act, including sections 3, 59, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 67, 74, 76, 77, 79, 83, and 114, to conclude that certified copies of public documents are admissible as secondary evidence to prove the contents of the original documents, but they do not establish the truth or accuracy of the contents. The truth of the contents must be separately established. 2. The court referred to section 159 and 164 of the Companies Act to hold that an annual return filed by a company under section 159 is prima facie evidence of any matters directed or authorized to be inserted therein by the Act.
Final Decision: The court held that the certified copies of the return of allotments and annual return filed by the company did not establish, even prima facie, the truth or accuracy of the contents of their originals. However, the court found that the extract of the annual return was prima facie evidence of the matters directed or authorized to be inserted therein by the Companies Act.

JUDGMENT - Bharucha S.P. J -The question to be decided arises in the context of a copy of the return of allotments filed by the 8th defendant Company with the Registrar of Companies and an extract of the Annual Return also so filed, both certified to be true by the Registrar under section 610 of the Companies Act. The said true copy and extract have been admitted on record as the 1st defendant's exhibits (at Exhibits 17 and 18). The question is: is the truth of their contents established prima facie as Mr. Nariman, learned counsel for the 1st defendant contends, or must the truth thereof be proved?

2. It is necessary to set out the relevant provisions of the Evidence Act In section 3 a document is defined as any matter expressed or described-ed upon any substance by means of letters, figures or marks or by more than one of those means, intended to be used or which may be used for the purpose of recording that matter. Again in section 3, a fact is said to be proved when after considering the matters before it, the Court either believes it to exist or considers its existence so probable that a prudent man ought, under the circumstances of the particular case, to act upon the supposition that it exists. Section 59 states that all facts, except the contents of documents, may be proved by oral evidence. Section 65, under the heading “Of documentary Evidence”, states that the contents of documents may be proved either by primary or secondary evidence. Section 62 states that primary evidence means the document itself produced for the inspection of the Court. Section 63 relates to secondary evidence and states that secondary evidence includes, inter alia, certified copies given under the provisions thereinafter contained in the Act, and oral accounts of the contents of a document given by some person who has himself seen it. Section 64 requires that documents must be proved by primary evidence except in the cases thereinafter mention-ed. Section 65 relates to those cases and states that secondary evidence may be given of the existence, condition or contents of a document. It states that it is only when the original is a public document within the meaning of section 74 that a certified copy of it, but no other kind of secondary evidence is admissible. Section 67 requires that if a document is alleged to be signed or to have been written wholly or in part by any person, the signature or the handwriting of so much of the document as is alleged to be in that person's handwriting must be proved to be in his handwriting. Sections 74 to 78 are are in relation to “Public Documents” and are “the provisions hereinafter contained” mentioned in section 63. Section 74 sets out what documents are public documents. Sub-section (1) states that documents forming the acts, or records of the acts of the sovereign authority, of official bodies and tribunals, and of public officers, legislative, judicial and executive, are public documents. Sub-section (2) states that public records kept in any State of- private documents are public documents. Under section 76 every public officer having the custody of a public document is obliged to give any person on demand a copy of it together with a certificate that it is a true copy of such document or part thereof; such copies so certified are called certified copies. Under section 77 such certified copies may be produced in proof of the contents of the public documents or parts of the public documents of which they purport to be copies. Sections 79 to 90 are under the head of “Presumptions as to documents”. Section 79 deals with certified copies; it provides that the Court shall presume to be genuine every document purporting to be a certificate, certified copy, or other document, which is by law declared to be admissible as evidence of any particular fact, and which purports to be duly certified by an officer of the Government. Under its pro-visions the Court shall also presume that any officer by whom such docume

Click Here to Read the rest of this document