2015 (12) TMI 318 - HC - Indian Laws

Certified copies under RTI Act admissible as secondary evidence: court ruling

Narayan Singh Versus Kallaram @ Kalluram Kushwaha And Others

The court held that certified copies obtained under the Right to Information Act, 2005 can be admitted as secondary evidence under Section 65(f) of the ... Whether the certified copy of documents obtained under Right to Information Act, 2005 can be admitted as secondary evidence - Held that:- Clause (f) of Section 65 of Evidence Act makes it crystal clear that a certified copy permitted under the Evidence Act or by any other law in force can be treated as secondary evidence. Right to Information Act, in my view, falls within the ambit of “by any other law in force in India”. The definition of “right to information” makes it clear that certified copies of documents are given to the citizens under their right to obtain information. In my view, the court below has rightly opined that the documents can be admitted as secondary evidence. I do not see any merit in the contention that the documents obtained under the Act of 2005 are either true copies or attested copies. - no legal error in the order of the court below, which warrants interference under Article 227 of the Constitution. The court below has taken a plausible view, which is in accordance with law - Since the documents are covered under section 65 of the Evidence Act, there was no need to compare the same with the originals. - Decided against assessee. Issues:Whether certified copies obtained under the Right to Information Act, 2005 can be admitted as secondary evidenceRs.Analysis:The case involved a petition questioning the admissibility of certified copies of documents obtained under the Right to Information Act, 2005 as secondary evidence. The defendant had applied under Section 65 of the Evidence Act, claiming that the documents obtained from Nagar Nigam were certified copies and should be accepted as secondary evidence. The court below had allowed this application, leading to the present challenge. The petitioner argued that the documents did not meet the requirements of Sections 63 and 65 of the Evidence Act, as they were not compared with the original documents and were merely 'attested' or 'true' copies. The respondent, on the other hand, supported the order and cited provisions of the Act of 2005 in defense.Upon considering the arguments, the judge noted the relevant provisions of the Evidence Act and the Act of 2005. Section 65(f) of the Evidence Act allows for certified copies to be treated as secondary evidence. The Act of 2005 defines the 'right to information' to include the right to obtain certified copies of documents. The judge interpreted that the Act of 2005 falls within the scope of 'any other law in force in India' as per Section 65(f) of the Evidence Act. Therefore, certified copies obtained under the Act of 2005 can be admitted as secondary evidence. The judge rejected the petitioner's contention that the documents were not certified copies, citing the definition of 'certified copy' from Black's Law Dictionary. The judge also clarified that since the documents were covered under Section 65 of the Evidence Act, there was no requirement to compare them with the originals.In conclusion, the judge found no legal error in the court below's order and dismissed the petition, stating that the lower court had taken a lawful stance. The judge emphasized that the documents obtained under the Act of 2005 were indeed certified copies and could be treated as secondary evidence. The petition was deemed meritless, and no costs were awarded.