Section 65 BSA: Proof of Signature and Handwriting

Section 65 BSA explains how courts determine whether a document was signed or written by the person to whom it is attributed.

Introduction

Section 65 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA) deals with the proof of signature and handwriting of a person alleged to have signed or written a document. It requires the signature or handwriting attributed to a person to be proved as that person’s handwriting.

This provision is important in civil and criminal proceedings involving disputed agreements, sale deeds, receipts, wills, promissory notes, handwritten letters and other documents. If a person denies signing a document, the party relying on it must establish the disputed signature or handwriting through legally acceptable evidence.

Section 65 BSA corresponds to Section 67 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. The wording has been carried forward substantially unchanged.

Bare Act: Section 65 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023

65. Proof of signature and handwriting of person alleged to have signed or written document produced.—

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.

Meaning of Section 65 BSA

Section 65 establishes a basic rule for proving the authenticity of signatures and handwriting in documents. When a party alleges that a particular person signed or wrote a document, the relevant signature or handwriting must be proved to belong to that person.

The section applies whether the person allegedly wrote the entire document or only a part of it.

For example, A produces a loan agreement bearing B’s signature. B denies signing the agreement. A cannot establish the disputed signature merely by asserting that it belongs to B. A must produce evidence capable of proving the signature’s authenticity.

The provision does not prescribe one exclusive method of proof. Depending on the circumstances, the signature or handwriting may be established through a person familiar with the handwriting, expert opinion, comparison with admitted or proved handwriting, or other legally admissible evidence.

Important: Proving a signature is not necessarily the same as proving the entire document’s execution, validity or enforceability. Other statutory requirements may apply depending on the type of document.

Essential Elements of Section 65 BSA

1. A document must be produced

The provision applies when a document is relied upon in proceedings and a person’s signature or handwriting is attributed to it.

Examples include:

• Agreements and contracts
• Sale deeds and other property documents
• Promissory notes and receipts
• Wills and handwritten declarations
• Letters and other handwritten records
• Applications, registers and official forms

The admissibility of the document and the proof of its signature are related but distinct questions.

2. The signature or handwriting must be attributed to a particular person

The party relying on the document must allege that the signature or relevant handwriting belongs to a particular person.

For example, a party may claim that a disputed receipt was signed by the defendant. If the defendant denies the signature, the identity of the person who signed becomes an evidentiary issue.

3. The relevant signature or handwriting must be proved

Section 65 requires proof that the disputed signature or handwriting is that of the person concerned. The court assesses the evidence presented to establish that fact.

Also Read: Section 72 BSA: Comparison of Signature, Writing or Seal

The provision does not mean that every disputed signature must automatically be examined by a handwriting expert. The appropriate method depends on the circumstances, the nature of the dispute and the other applicable provisions of evidence law.

How Can a Signature or Handwriting Be Proved?

1. Evidence of a person familiar with the handwriting

A person who is familiar with another person’s handwriting may provide relevant evidence concerning its identity, subject to the applicable rules of evidence.

For example, an employee who has regularly dealt with a person’s handwritten correspondence may be able to identify that person’s handwriting.

2. Expert opinion

A handwriting expert may examine the disputed writing and compare it with admitted or proved specimens. The expert may provide an opinion on whether the writings appear to have been made by the same person.

Section 39 BSA, which deals with expert opinions, is relevant where the court requires assistance on handwriting identification.

An expert’s opinion is evidence for the court to evaluate; it is not automatically conclusive.

3. Comparison with admitted or proved handwriting

Section 72 BSA permits comparison of a disputed signature, writing or seal with one admitted or proved to the court’s satisfaction to have been made by the relevant person.

The court may also direct a person present before it to provide specimen writing for comparison, subject to the applicable law.

4. Admission by the person concerned

An admission that a signature or handwriting belongs to a person may be relevant evidence. The legal effect of the admission and any remaining dispute must be assessed in the context of the proceedings.

5. Other relevant evidence

The circumstances surrounding the preparation, signing or execution of a document may also be relevant. However, surrounding circumstances should not be treated as an automatic substitute for proving a disputed signature when the law requires such proof.

Difference Between Proof of Signature and Proof of Execution

These concepts are connected but should not be confused.

Basis	Proof of signature or handwriting	Proof of execution
Main question	Was the signature or handwriting made by the person concerned?	Was the document executed in the legally relevant manner?
Focus	Identity of the person who signed or wrote	Completion of the legally required act of execution
Relevant provision	Section 65 BSA	Sections 67–71 BSA may apply to documents requiring attestation or other forms of execution
Example	Establishing that a signature on an agreement belongs to B	Establishing that a will was executed with the legally required formalities

A signature may be genuine, yet a separate issue may arise concerning whether the document was executed voluntarily, whether statutory formalities were followed, or whether the document is otherwise legally valid.

Important Case Laws on Proof of Signature and Handwriting

The following decisions explain the principles relevant to Section 65 BSA. Earlier judgments interpreting the Indian Evidence Act remain useful for understanding the corresponding provision, but their statutory references should not be confused with the current BSA numbering.

1. Ajit Savant Majagavi v. State of Karnataka (1997)

Citation: (1997) 7 SCC 110; AIR 1997 SC 3255.

Court: Supreme Court of India.

Legal issue: The case discussed the court’s power to compare disputed handwriting or signatures with admitted or proved specimens under Section 73 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

Principle: The Supreme Court explained that comparison could be undertaken by a handwriting expert, a person familiar with the handwriting, or the court itself under the applicable provisions. However, the court cautioned that judicial comparison requires care and that expert assistance should ordinarily be preferred where doubt exists.

Also Read: Section 66 BSA: Proof as to Electronic Signature

Relevance to Section 65 BSA: Section 72 BSA now addresses comparison of a signature, writing or seal with others admitted or proved. The decision helps explain one method by which the identity of disputed handwriting may be assessed.

The case should not be described as holding that a court’s visual comparison is always sufficient or that expert evidence is mandatory in every dispute.

2. Abinash Kumar v. Union of India (2026)

Case reference: WP.CT 63 of 2026, judgment dated 13 May 2026, reported as 2026:CHC-AS:720-DB.

Court: Calcutta High Court, Appellate Side.

Facts: The dispute concerned alleged differences between handwriting and signatures on a recruitment application and those appearing on examination documents, including an OMR answer sheet, call letter and attendance sheet. Government handwriting-examination authorities had examined the documents.

Decision: The High Court declined to interfere with the tribunal’s decision, which had relied on the expert reports. It referred to Section 39 BSA regarding expert opinion and Section 65 BSA regarding proof of handwriting and signatures.

Principle: Expert evidence concerning the identity of handwriting and signatures can be relevant in determining whether documents were written or signed by the person to whom they are attributed. The court must assess the expert reports and the evidence in the particular case.

Relevance to Section 65 BSA: This judgment directly discusses Section 65 BSA and demonstrates its application in a dispute involving alleged impersonation and questioned handwriting. It is a High Court decision, not a Supreme Court ruling.

Difference Between Section 65 BSA and Section 67 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872

Basis	Section 65 BSA	Section 67 Indian Evidence Act
Subject	Proof of signature and handwriting	Proof of signature and handwriting
Main requirement	Relevant signature or handwriting must be proved to belong to the person concerned	Substantially the same requirement
Statutory wording	Carried forward substantially unchanged	Earlier provision
Current statutory framework	Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023	Repealed from 1 July 2024, subject to applicable savings and transitional rules

Section 65 BSA came into force on 1 July 2024. For proceedings involving the transition from the former Evidence Act, the applicable savings and transitional provisions should be considered before deciding which statute governs.

Related Provisions of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023

• Section 39: Opinions of experts, relevant to handwriting-expert evidence.
• Section 41: Opinion as to handwriting and signature, when relevant.
• Section 66: Proof as to electronic signature.
• Sections 67–71: Provisions dealing with proof of execution of documents requiring attestation and related situations.
• Section 72: Comparison of signature, writing or seal with others admitted or proved.

These provisions work together to address the identity of handwriting, expert assistance, comparison of signatures and proof of execution where additional formalities are required.

Important Points for Law Students and Judiciary Aspirants

• Section 65 BSA corresponds to Section 67 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
• The section requires the relevant signature or handwriting to be proved as that of the person alleged to have signed or written the document.
• The provision covers documents written wholly or partly by a person.
• There is no single exclusive method of proof prescribed by Section 65.
• Expert opinion, evidence from a person familiar with the handwriting, admissions and comparison with admitted or proved specimens may be relevant.
• Section 39 BSA concerns expert opinions, while Section 72 BSA addresses comparison of signatures, writing and seals.
• Proof of a signature does not automatically establish every aspect of a document’s execution, validity or enforceability.
• Ajit Savant Majagavi v. State of Karnataka is relevant to judicial comparison of handwriting under the predecessor law.
• Abinash Kumar v. Union of India (2026) directly discusses Sections 39 and 65 BSA in the context of disputed handwriting and signatures.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

1. What is Section 65 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023?

Section 65 provides that when a document is alleged to have been signed or written wholly or partly by a person, the relevant signature or handwriting must be proved to be that person’s handwriting.

2. Which section of the Indian Evidence Act corresponds to Section 65 BSA?

Section 65 BSA corresponds to Section 67 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

3. Is a handwriting expert compulsory under Section 65 BSA?

No. Section 65 does not prescribe handwriting-expert evidence as the exclusive method of proof. The appropriate evidence depends on the circumstances and the other applicable provisions.

4. Can a court compare a disputed signature with an admitted signature?

Yes. Section 72 BSA provides for comparison of a signature, writing or seal with one admitted or proved to the court’s satisfaction to have been made by the relevant person. The court must exercise this power carefully.

5. What happens if a person denies signing an agreement?

The party relying on the agreement must establish the disputed signature through legally acceptable evidence. The court then evaluates that evidence along with the other relevant circumstances.

6. Does proving a signature establish that the whole document is valid?

Not necessarily. Proof of a signature addresses the identity of the person who signed or wrote the relevant part. Questions concerning execution, consent, statutory formalities, validity and enforceability may require separate consideration.

Conclusion

Section 65 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 establishes the requirement for proving a signature or handwriting attributed to a person in a produced document. Its practical importance lies in disputes involving agreements, property documents, receipts, wills and other records whose authenticity is challenged. For examinations, the key is to distinguish proof of handwriting from proof of execution, and to understand how expert opinion and comparison under the related provisions may assist the court.

dfsad