Secondary evidence and photocopies are inadmissible where original documents were allegedly destroyed by the beneficiary and tampering risk remains.

Secondary evidence by photocopy is not ordinarily admissible under Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act unless the party relying on it shows that the original cannot be produced for a legally recognised reason. The best evidence rule remains the norm, and photocopies are especially suspect where the originals were allegedly destroyed by the very persons in whose favour the documents created enforceable rights or obligations. In that setting, the Court treated the documents as lacking safe evidentiary character and refused to accept them on a mere request because the risk of alteration or tampering could not be ruled out. Refusal to prove the photocopies was therefore upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether secondary evidence in the form of photocopies could be permitted in respect of documents allegedly destroyed by the persons in whose favour they created enforceable legal rights or obligations.

Analysis: Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 permits secondary evidence only in the circumstances specified therein, and the foundational requirement is that the party seeking to rely on such evidence must show that the original cannot be produced for reasons recognised by law. The rule is an exception to the best evidence principle, under which primary evidence remains the normal mode of proof. Where the originals are said to have been destroyed by the very persons in whose possession they were and in whose favour they operated, the Court treated the situation as one where the documents had lost their safe evidentiary character. Photocopies, being susceptible to manipulation and not being certified copies, could not be accepted on mere request, particularly when the possibility of alteration or tampering could not be ruled out.

Conclusion: Secondary evidence was not admissible on the facts, and the refusal to allow proof of the photocopies was upheld.

Ratio Decidendi: Secondary evidence under Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 is ordinarily not admissible where the original document was destroyed by the very party in whose favour it created a legal right or obligation, because such documents are vulnerable to tampering and do not justify departure from the best evidence rule.

---