Law on Electronic Evidence In India under S. 61 – 63 of the BSA

Saji Koduvath, Advocate, Kottayam.

Contents in a Nutshell
•• • 1. Sec. 63 BSA: Status of Copy (computer output) is raised to Original
•• • 2. Thereby, the admissibility of such a copy is not subject to S. 58 (recognised forms of secondary evidence) & S. 60 (when secondary evidence is admissible).
•• • 3. S. 63 Certificate – an Enabling Provision (See words: ALSO  &  DESIRED)
•• • 4. S. 63 Certificate – confined to “STATEMENTS”  (Not  “computer output“)
•• • 5. S. 61 BSA is a New Provision; It is to Override  Arjun Panditrao
•• • 6. Arjun Panditrao:  ‘Statements’ Embrace even Video and Photograph
•• • 7. Drastic Legislative Change to  Arjun Panditrao – (to secure alternative routes)
•• • 8. S. 63 Applies only “If the Conditions ….   Are Satisfied”
•• • 9.  Contents of Section 63(4) Certificate                                                          
•• • 10. The words “Subject to S. 63” in S. 61 do not Suggest Certificate Compulsory.
•• • 11. HASH Value Certificate – Logic requires hash values (of copy) at the time of ‘copying’.

1. Sec. 63 BSA: Status of Copy (computer output) is raised to Original

Section 63, Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, speaks as to copy (computer output)  as under  –   

  • “ (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Act … any information contained in an  electronic record  which is printed on paper….  or copied in any electronic form  (hereinafter referred to as the  computer output) shall be deemed to be also a document …..”

Three important legal effects of Section 63(1)

  • 1. The opening words, “Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act,” in Section 63(1) are directed only to the statutory fiction that a computer output shall be deemed to be an electronic record (i.e., the original document). The non obstante clause is confined to this deeming provision. It should not be construed as overriding every provision of the Act relating to the proof or admissibility of electronic evidence. Its function is only to support the legal fiction created by Section 63(1), not to govern the admissibility of electronic evidence generally.
  • 2. Under Section 63(1), a ‘computer output‘ (copy) is deemed to be a document. The computer output is raised to the status of an electronic record (original) for the purposes of admissibility.
  • 3. The effect of sub-section (4) is that the admissibility of a ‘computer output’ (copy) is not subject to the requirements of Section 58 (which defines the recognised forms of secondary evidence), or Section 60 (which specifies the circumstances in which secondary evidence is admissible).
    • Note: When the document is defined in Section 2(1)(d), it is laid down as under: ”
      • ” ‘document’ means any matter expressed or described or otherwise recorded upon any substance by means of letters, figures or marks or any other means or by more than one of those means, intended to be used, or which may be used, for the purpose of recording that matter and includes electronic and digital records.”

2. S. 63 Certificate – an Enabling Provision

  • Section 63, Certificate is not mandatory; it is only an enabling provision for the following:
  • 1. Section 62, BSA says –
    • The contents of electronic records MAY   be proved  (not shall be proved) in accordance with the provisions of section 63.  
  • 2. Section 63(1), BSA reads –
    • … “the computer output shall be deemed to be ALSO a document”
  • 3. Section 63(4) lays down:
    • “where it is desired to give a statement in evidence, by virtue of this section”, it can be had by a “certificate”.
  • Note: Though there is a contradiction in terms on “Notwithstanding anything” on one hand and “also” and “desire” in another, on a harmonious reading, it is definite that it is an enabling provision. (If the strict interpretation is applied, admission by the other side will also not enable marking an electronic document.)
  • Therefore, an electronic document can be dealt with in accordance with the general principles applicable to documentary evidence in other provisions of the Evidence Act/ Adhiniyam. The certificate requirement (marking a document otherwise than through a witness) operates as an enabling or facilitative provision.

Section 63 does not Constitute an Exhaustive Code. Why?

Where the conditions prescribed in Section 63(1), read with Section 63(2), are not satisfied, or the deeming provisions cannot be invoked, the consequence is only that the benefit of the statutory deeming fiction (admissible without further proof or production of the original) cannot be invoked.

The inability to prove a computer output, invoking the statutory deeming provision, does not render the computer output inadmissible or incapable of proof.

  • It can still be proved by any other lawful mode of proof recognised by the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, if the facts of the case permit.

Accordingly, Section 63 does not constitute an exhaustive code governing the proof of computer outputs or electronic evidence. It merely provides one statutory method of proof by conferring the benefit of a legal fiction upon a computer output that satisfies the requirements of the section.

3. S. 63 Certificate – Confined to “STATEMENTS” (Not “computer output“)

  • It is definite from the very statute – Section 63(4), BSA Certificate is confined to “STATEMENTS”.
  • It reads as under:
    • “In any proceeding where it is desired to give a STATEMENT in evidence, by virtue of this section, a certificate doing any of the following things shall be submitted along with the electronic record”.
  • Note: 1. What is stated is NOT – where it is desired to give a ‘computer output‘ in evidence. Instead, it speaks of giving a “statement”.
  • Note: 2. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court (Arjun Panditrao  Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal, (2020) 7 SCC 1: AIR 2020 SC 4908) does not accept this view. It is held –
    • “The drill of Section 65A and 65B alone be followed when it comes to admissibility of information contained in electronic records.”
  • Note: 3. “STATEMENT” according to BSA is –
    • that which can be expressed in the form of ‘oral evidence’. It is clear from the following
    • “STATEMENT” according to BSA is – expressed in ‘oral evidence’.
      • Sec: 2(1)(e) – Evidence is statements of witnesses
      • 15 -19 – Admission is statement of witness
      • 26 – Statement of a dead person
      • 28 – Entries in books of account
      • 30 – Statements in maps, plans
      • 31 – Statements in Acts Notification
      • 32 – Statements in law books
      • 33 – If longer statements
      • 79 – Statement of accused
      • Also See Sections: 89, 94, 95, 125, 147,
      • Also See Sections: 148, 158, 160, 161.

4. CCTV footage, CDs & Trap Video: Cannot be Proved with a Certificate

  • Following are the conditions for admissibility of a computer output under Section 63(2) —
    • (a) the computer output containing the information was produced by the computer or communication device during the period over which the computer or communication device was used regularly to create, store or process information for the purposes of any activity regularly carried on over that period by the person having lawful control over the use of the computer or communication device; 
    • (b) during the said period, information of the kind contained in the electronic record or of the kind from which the information so contained is derived was regularly fed into the computer or communication device in the ordinary course of the said activities;
    • (c) throughout the material part of the said period, the computer or communication device was operating properly or, if not, then in respect of any period in which it was not operating properly or was out of operation during that part of the period, was not such as to affect the electronic record or the accuracy of its contents; and
    • (d) the information contained in the electronic record reproduces or is derived from such information fed into the computer or communication device in the ordinary course of the said activities.
ItemSectionWhy not attracted
CCTV Footage63(2)(a)Device was NOT used regularly for any activity regularly carried on by the person having lawful control.
Photograph,
Trap-Video or
CDs of speech
Videograph of the scene of the crime,		63(2)(b)NOT regularly fed into the device in the ordinary course. 
63(2)(d)NOT derived from such information fed in the ordinary course.

5. Arjun Panditrao:  ‘STATEMENT’ Embrace even Video and Photograph

  • In Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal, the Supreme Court adopted an expansive interpretation of the expression “statements.” It pressed the requirement of a certificate under Section 65B as a general condition for the admissibility of all forms of computer output (copies).
  • In other words, the term “statement” was construed to embrace all forms of computer output, regardless of their nature—whether a video, a photograph, or any other digital record. However, such an expansive construction does not appear to be supported either by the text of the provision or by its underlying rationale and intended scope.
  • Section 63, Adhiniyam, now requires expert opinion or hash value certification over and above the Certificate laid down in the former provision under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act.

Read :Sec. 65B, Evidence Act: Arjun Paditrao  Criticised.

6. S. 61 BSA is a New Provision; it is to Override Arjun Panditrao

  • Section 61 of the BSA, is a new provision. It was not in the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Section 61, Adhiniyam says as under:
    • “61.  Electronic or digital record.  Nothing in this Adhiniyam shall apply to deny the admissibility of an electronic or digital record in the evidence on the ground that it is an electronic or digital record and such record shall,  subject to section 63, have the same legal effect, validity and enforceability as other document.”
  • It is plain — Section 61 is a provision intended to secure alternative routes for admitting computer outputs (copies of electronic records), that is, otherwise than through the certificate contemplated under Section 63.
  • The Supreme Court decision in  Arjun Panditrao  Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal, (2020) 7 SCC 1: AIR 2020 SC 4908,  had established a strict interpretation. It laid down that the proof by the certificate under Section 65B (Section 63, Adhiniyam) was mandatory for admitting a computer output (copy) in evidence. Thus, it is clear – S. 61 BSA is to override Arjun Panditrao.

7. Drastic Legislative Change to  Arjun Panditrao

  • Section 61, Adhiniyam made a drastic legislative change to the deliberation placed by  Arjun Panditrao  Khotkar. By virtue of Section 61, a computer output (i.e., a copy of an electronic record) is capable of being proved by any mode of proof recognised under the Adhiniyam, and is not restricted to proof solely through the certificate.
  • In any event, Section 61 is worded with a view that it must be understood as a provision intended to secure alternative routes for admitting computer outputs (copies of electronic records); that is, otherwise than through the certificate contemplated under Section 63.

8. Section 63(4) Certificate

Section 63(4) BSA reads as under:

  • “(4) In any proceeding where it is desired to give a  statement  in evidence by virtue of this section, a certificate doing any of the following things shall be submitted along with the electronic record at each instance where it is being submitted for admission, namely:—
  • .(a) identifying the electronic record containing the  statement  and describing the manner in which it was produced;
  • (b) giving such particulars of any device involved in the production of that electronic record as may be appropriate for the purpose of showing that the electronic record was produced by a computer or a communication device referred to in clauses (a) to (e) of sub-section (3);
The following are the clauses (a) to (e) of sub-section (3)
.(a) in stand-alone mode; or
(b) on a computer system; or
(c) on a computer network; or
(d) on a computer resource ….; or
(e) through an intermediary.
  • (c) dealing with any of the matters to which the conditions mentioned in sub-section (2) relate,
The conditions in sub-section (2)—
.(a) ….   during the period …. used regularly …;
(b) …. information ….. regularly fed;
(c) …. operating properly ….; and
(d) information …. fed … in the ordinary course …
  • and purporting to be signed by a person in charge of the computer or communication device or the management of the relevant activities (whichever is appropriate)  and an  expert  shall be evidence of any matter stated in the certificate; and for the purposes of this sub-section it shall be sufficient for a matter to be stated to the best of the knowledge and belief of the person stating it  in the certificate specified in the Schedule.”

9. Do the words “Subject to S. 63” in S. 61 Suggest Certificate Compulsory?

  • Section 61 reads as under:
    • “Nothing in this Adhiniyam shall apply to deny the admissibility of an electronic or digital record in the evidence on the ground that it is an electronic or digital record and such record shall,  subject to section 63, have the same legal effect, validity and enforceability as other document.”
  • Do the words “subject to Section 63”  in Section 61 suggest that the admissibility of a computer output depends upon the compulsory production of the certificate under Section 63?
  • This argument can be responded as under:
  • 1. The above interpretation (based on the words “subject to Section 63”) would defeat the very purpose of introducing the new provision (Section 61), which expressly states – “Nothing in this Adhiniyam shall apply to deny the admissibility of an electronic or digital record in the evidence on the ground that it is an electronic or digital record”.
  • 2. If the certificate under Section 63 were to remain as an inflexible rule, Section 61 would be rendered surplusage or otiose.
  • 3. The harmonious construction would therefore be the following-
  • 4. Section 61 seeks to mitigate the rigidity of the earlier position (as reflected in Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal), which was understood to require that a computer output be proved only through a certificate under Section 63(4). And, Section 61 permits proof through any recognised mode, while retaining Section 63 as one of the available methods of proof.

10. HASH Value Certificate  – Logic Requires Hash Values (of copy) at the time of ‘Copying’

The Certificate required in Sec. 63(4)(c) of the Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA) must be:

  • (i) “purporting to be signed by a person in charge of the computer or communication device or the management of the relevant activities (whichever is appropriate) and an expert shall be evidence of any matter stated in the certificate” and
  • (ii) “in the form specified in the Schedule”.
  • Note:  
    • Sec. 63(4)(c) of the BSA does not specifically mandate hashing of copy, and it must be done at the time of copying.
    • But logic and the judicial precedents strongly support recording the hash values (of copy) at the time of ‘copying’.

11. Conclusion

Section 61 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, restores flexibility by recognising alternative modes of proof, while reserving Section 63 for a specific, certificate-based method of admissibility.

Section 61 has been introduced with the following clear and purposeful objectives:

  • 1. To clarify that a computer output (i.e., a copy of an electronic record) can be proved by examining a competent witness, and not exclusively by producing a certificate under Section 63(4).
  • 2. To make it clear that the procedural requirements under Section 63(4), such as furnishing a certificate and hash value apply only when a party opts to rely on that mode of proof (without examining a witness).

Viewed in this light, Section 61 can be seen –

  • (i) as a legislative response to the strict and mandatory approach adopted in Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal, and
  • (ii) as an attempt to ensure flexibility in the law relating to electronic evidence to align with global trends in jurisdictions such as the United Kingdom, the United States and Canada.
Read Also
• Law on Electronic Evidence In India under S. 61 – 63 of the BSA
•  “Notwithstanding Anything Contained in this Adhiniyam” – The Non Obstante Clause in Section 63(1) BSA is Confined to the Deeming Fiction.
• Is a Section 63(4) Certificate an Essential Prerequisite for the Admission of a Photograph in  Evidence?
• Admissibility of Electronic Evidence: Does Section 61 of the BSA Permit Oral Proof (Overriding Arjun  Panditrao)
• Law on Electronic Evidence in India: A Comparative Analysis with Other  Jurisdictions
• Hash Value Certificate – Mandatory or  Directory
• Sakshya Adhiniyam (Literally) Mandates Hashing the Original. But the Established Jurisprudence Requires Hashing the  Copy.
• Law on Electronic Evidence under  S. 61 – 63 of the BSA
• Sec. 65B (Electronic Records) and Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam,  2023
• Sec. 65B, Evidence Act: Arjun Paditrao  Criticised.
• Sec. 65B Evidence Act  Simplified
• ‘STATEMENTS’ alone can be proved by ‘CERTIFICATE’ u/s. 65B
• Sec. 65B,   Evidence Act: Certificate forms
• “Nothing  In This Adhiniyam Shall Apply To Deny The Admissibility” – New Provision (Sec. 61, BSA) to ensure that Sec. 65B (Sec. 63, BSA) is an enabling&nbs p;provision
• Certificate is Required Only for ‘Computer Output’; Not for ‘Electronic Records’: Arjun Panditrao  Explored.
• How to Prove ‘Whatsap Messages’, ‘Facebook’ and ‘Website’ in  Courts?

End Notes:

Sections 56 to 60 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, deal generally with law on documents. They read as under:

  • 56. Proof of contents of documents. The contents of documents may be proved either by primary or by secondary evidence.
  • 57. Proof of documents by primary evidence. Documents shall be proved by primary evidence except in the cases hereinafter mentioned.
  • 58. Secondary evidence. Secondary evidence includes—
    • (i) certified copies given under the provisions hereinafter contained;
    • (ii) copies made from the original by mechanical processes which in themselves ensure the accuracy of the copy, and copies compared with such copies;
    • (iii) copies made from or compared with the original;
    • (iv) counterparts of documents as against the parties who did not execute them;
    • (v) oral accounts of the contents of a document given by some person who has himself seen it;
    • (vi) oral admissions;
    • (vii)  written admissions;
    • (viii) evidence of a person who has examined a document, the original of which consists of numerous accounts or other documents which cannot conveniently be examined in Court, and who is skilled in the examination of such documents.”
  • 59. Primary evidence. Primary evidence means the document itself produced for the inspection of the Court.
  • 60. Cases in which secondary evidence relating to documents may be given. Secondary evidence may be given of the existence, condition, or contents of a document in the following cases, namely:
    • (a) when the original is shown or appears to be in the possession or power-(i) of the person against whom the document is sought to be proved; or(ii) of any person out of reach of, or not subject to, the process of the Court; or(iii) of any person legally bound to produce it, and when, after the notice mentioned in section 64 such person does not produce it;
Section 64. Rules as to notice to produce. Secondary evidence …. in clause (a) of section 60, shall not be given unless …. previously given …. such notice to produce it:
Provided that such notice shall not be required
.(a) (b) when, from the nature of the case, the adverse party must know that he will be required to produce it;
(c) …(d) …..
(e) when the adverse party or his agent has admitted the loss of the document;
(f) …..
“Adverse Party Must Know that He Will Be Required To Produce It”
Some instances:
1. A photocopy of a document was produced before the court by him.
2. The owner of a goods vehicle was questioned as to the contents of a permit to suggest that it did not contain a permit to take passengers.
3. When a witness “is about to make any statement as to the contents of a document, the opposite party objected it”, under Section 147 of the BSA.
  • (b) when the existence, condition or contents of the original have been proved to be admitted in writing by the person against whom it is proved or by his representative in interest;
  • (c) when 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 reasonable time;
  • (d) when the original is of such a nature as not to be easily movable;
  • (e) when the original is a public document within the meaning of section 74;
  • (f) when the original is a document of which a certified copy is permitted by this Adhiniyam, or by any other law in force in India to be given in evidence;
  • (g) when the originals consist of numerous accounts or other documents which cannot conveniently be examined in Court, and the fact to be proved is the general result of the whole collection.
  • Explanation.  – For the purposes of-
    • (i) clauses (a), (c) and (d), any secondary evidence of the contents of the document is admissible;
    • (ii) clause (b), the written admission is admissible;
    • (iii) clause (e) or (f), a certified copy of the document, but no other kind of secondary evidence, is admissible;
    • (iv) clause (g), evidence may be given as to the general result of the documents by any person who has examined them, and who is skilled in the examination of such document.

Sections 61, 62, 63 of the BSA deal with electronic or digital evidence. They read as under:

  • 61.  Electronic or digital record.  Nothing in this Adhiniyam shall apply to deny the admissibility of an electronic or digital record in the evidence on the ground that it is an electronic or digital record and such record shall,  subject to section 63, have the same legal effect, validity and enforceability as other document.
  • 62. Special provisions as to evidence relating to electronic record. The contents of electronic records may be proved in accordance with the provisions of section 63.
  • 63. Admissibility of electronic records.   (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Adhiniyam, any information contained in an electronic record which is printed on paper, stored, recorded or copied in optical or magnetic media or semiconductor memory which is produced by a computer or any communication device or otherwise stored, recorded or copied in any electronic form (hereinafter referred to as the computer output) shall be deemed to be also a document, if the conditions mentioned in this section are satisfied in relation to the information and computer in question and shall be admissible in any proceedings, without further proof or production of the original, as evidence or any contents of the original or of any fact stated therein of which direct evidence would be admissible.
  • (2) The conditions referred to in sub-section (1) in respect of a computer output shall be the following, namely:—
    • (a) the computer output containing the information was produced by the computer or communication device during the period over which the computer or communication device was used regularly to create, store or process information for the purposes of any activity regularly carried on over that period by the person having lawful control over the use of the computer or communication device;
    • (b) during the said period, information of the kind contained in the electronic record or of the kind from which the information so contained is derived was regularly fed into the computer or communication device in the ordinary course of the said activities;
    • (c) throughout the material part of the said period, the computer or communication device was operating properly or, if not, then in respect of any period in which it was not operating properly or was out of operation during that part of the period, was not such as to affect the electronic record or the accuracy of its contents; and
    • (d) the information contained in the electronic record reproduces or is derived from such information fed into the computer or communication device in the ordinary course of the said activities.
  • (3) Where over any period, the function of creating, storing or processing information for the purposes of any activity regularly carried on over that period as mentioned in clause (a) of sub-section (2) was regularly performed by means of one or more computers or communication device, whether—
    • (a) in stand-alone mode; or
    • (b) on a computer system; or
    • (c) on a computer network; or
    • (d) on a computer resource enabling information creation or providing information processing and storage; or
    • (e) through an intermediary,
  • all the computers or communication devices used for that purpose during that period shall be treated for the purposes of this section as constituting a single computer or communication device; and references in this section to a computer or communication device shall be construed accordingly.
  • (4) In any proceeding where it is desired to give a STATEMENT in evidence by virtue of this section, a certificate doing any of the following things shall be submitted along with the electronic record at each instance where it is being submitted for admission, namely:—
    • (a) identifying the electronic record containing the statement and describing the manner in which it was produced;
    • (b) giving such particulars of any device involved in the production of that electronic record as may be appropriate for the purpose of showing that the electronic record was produced by a computer or a communication device referred to in clauses (a) to (e) of sub-section (3);
    • (c) dealing with any of the matters to which the conditions mentioned in sub-section (2) relate,
  • and purporting to be signed by a person in charge of the computer or communication device or the management of the relevant activities (whichever is appropriate) and an expert shall be evidence of any matter stated in the certificate; and for the purposes of this sub-section it shall be sufficient for a matter to be stated to the best of the knowledge and belief of the person stating it in the certificate specified in the Schedule.
  • (5) For the purposes of this section,—
    • (a) information shall be taken to be supplied to a computer or communication device if it is supplied thereto in any appropriate form and whether it is so supplied directly or (with or without human intervention) by means of any appropriate equipment;
    • (b) a computer output shall be taken to have been produced by a computer or communication device whether it was produced by it directly or (with or without human intervention) by means of any appropriate equipment or by other electronic means as referred to in clauses (a) to (e) of sub-section (3).

End Notes:

The schedule in the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023

THE SCHEDULE

[See section 63(4)(c)]

CERTIFICATE

PART A

(To be filled by the Party)

I, _____________________ (Name), Son/daughter/spouse of ___________________ residing/employed at __________________________ do hereby solemnly affirm and sincerely state and submit as follows:—

I have produced electronic record/output of the digital record taken from the following device/digital record source (tick mark):—

Computer / Storage Media # DVR # Mobile # Flash Drive # CD/DVD # Server # Cloud # Other #

Other: ________________________________________ Make & Model: _______________ Color: _______________ Serial Number: _______________ IMEI/UIN/UID/MAC/Cloud ID _____________________ (as applicable) and any other relevant information, if any, about the device/digital record ____ (specify).

The digital device or the digital record source was under the lawful control for regularly creating, storing or processing information for the purposes of carrying out regular activities and during this period, the computer or the communication device was working properly and the relevant information was regularly fed into the computer during the ordinary course of business. If the computer/digital device at any point of time was not working properly or out of operation, then it has not affected the electronic/digital record or its accuracy. The digital device or the source of the digital record is:—

Owned #   Maintained # Managed # Operated by me (select as applicable).

I state that the HASH value/s of the electronic/digital record/s is _________________, obtained through the following algorithm:—

#   SHA1:

#   SHA256:

#   MD5:

#   Other__________________ (Legally acceptable standard)

(Hash report to be enclosed with the certificate)

(Name and signature)

Date (DD/MM/YYYY): _____

Time (IST): ________ hours (In 24 hours format)

Place: ____________

PART B

(To be filled by the Expert)

I, ____________________ (Name), Son/daughter/spouse of _____________________ residing/employed at _________________________ do hereby solemnly affirm and sincerely state and submit as follows:—

  The produced electronic record/output of the digital record are obtained from the following device/digital record source (tick mark):—

Computer / Storage Media #     DVR #     Mobile #   Flash Drive # CD/DVD #   Server Cloud #   Other #   Other: ________________________________________

Make & Model: _______________ Color: _______________

Serial Number: _______________

IMEI/UIN/UID/MAC/Cloud ID_____________________ (as applicable) and any other relevant information, if any, about the device/digital record _______ (specify).

I state that the HASH value/s of the electronic/digital record/s is _____________________, obtained through the following algorithm:—

#   SHA1:

#   SHA256:

#   MD5:

#   Other__________________ (Legally acceptable standard)

(Hash report to be enclosed with the certificate)

(Name, designation and signature)

Date (DD/MM/YYYY): _____

Time (IST): ________ hours (In 24 hours format)

Place: ____________

How to Subscribe ‘IndianLawLive’? Click here  –  “How to Subscribe  free  “

Read in this Cluster (Click on the Topic)

Civil Suits: Procedure & Principles

Book No, 1 –  Civil Procedure Code

Principles and Procedure

PROPERTY LAW

Title, ownership and Possession

Recovery of Possession:  

Survey, Revenue Records, Mutation

Adverse Possession

Land Laws/  Transfer of Property Act

Land Reform Laws

Power of attorney

Evidence Act – General

Sec. 65B

Admission, Relevancy and Proof

Law on Documents

Documents – Proof and Presumption

Interpretation

Contract Act

Law on Damages

Easement

Stamp Act & Registration

Natural Justice/Disciplinary Action

Divorce/Marriage

Negotiable Instruments Act

Criminal

Arbitration

Will

Book No.  2:  A Handbook on Constitutional Issues

Religious issues

Book No.  3:  Common Law of CLUBS and SOCIETIES in India

Book No.  4:  Common Law of TRUSTS in India

Unknown's avatar

Published by sajikoduvath

Leave a Comment