Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023
Section 88
Presumption as to certified copies of foreign judicial records
(1) The Court may presume that any document purporting to be a certified copy of any judicial record of any country beyond India is genuine and accurate, if the document purports to be certified in any manner which is certified by any representative of the Central Government in or for such country to be the manner commonly in use in that country for the certification of copies of judicial records.
(2) An officer who, with respect to any territory or place outside India is a Political Agent therefor, as defined in clause (43) of section 3 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 (10 of 1897), shall, for the purposes of this section, be deemed to be a representative of the Central Government in and for the country comprising that territory or place.
Why this exists
Indian courts often need to rely on judicial records from other countries—for example, in cases involving foreign marriages, divorces, property, or crimes. Since it's impractical to independently verify every foreign document, the law allows courts to presume genuineness when the certification follows that country's normal practice, confirmed by a Central Government representative. This saves time and avoids demanding impossible standards of proof for documents from abroad. It carries forward a similar provision from the earlier Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
Common misconceptions
- Myth: Any foreign document copy is automatically accepted as true.
Fact: The court only 'may' presume it's genuine, and only if the certification method is confirmed as standard practice by a Central Government representative—it's not automatic or mandatory. - Myth: This section proves the content of the judgment is correct.
Fact: It only presumes the copy is genuine and accurately certified, not that the underlying judgment's legal conclusions are correct or binding in India.