Section 77 – Proof of other official documents Presumptions as to Documents

Introduction

Section 77 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA), 2023 specifies the legally recognised methods for proving different categories of official public documents. It covers government Acts, orders and notifications, legislative proceedings, proclamations published in the Official Gazette, foreign government records, municipal proceedings and certain other foreign public documents.

This section corresponds to Section 78 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. It provides specific methods of proof for different classes of official documents rather than imposing a single procedure for all of them.

Bare Act: Section 77 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023

77. Proof of other official documents.—

The following public documents may be proved as follows:—

(a) Acts, orders or notifications of the Central Government in any of its Ministries and Departments or of any State Government or any Department of any State Government or Union territory Administration—

(i) by the records of the Departments, certified by the head of those Departments respectively; or

(ii) by any document purporting to be printed by order of any such Government;

(b) the proceedings of Parliament or a State Legislature, by the journals of those bodies respectively, or by published Acts or abstracts, or by copies purporting to be printed by order of the Government concerned;

(c) proclamations, orders or Regulations issued by the President of India or the Governor of a State or the Administrator or Lieutenant Governor of a Union territory, by copies or extracts contained in the Official Gazette;

(d) the Acts of the Executive or the proceedings of the Legislature of a foreign country, by journals published by their authority, or commonly received in that country as such, or by a copy certified under the seal of the country or sovereign, or by a recognition thereof in any Central Act;

(e) the proceedings of a municipal or local body in a State, by a copy of such proceedings, certified by the legal keeper thereof, or by a printed book purporting to be published by the authority of such body;

(f) public documents of any other class in a foreign country, by the original or by a copy certified by the legal keeper thereof, with a certificate under the seal of a Notary Public, or of an Indian Consul or diplomatic agent, that the copy is duly certified by the officer having the legal custody of the original, and upon proof of the character of the document according to the law of the foreign country.

Meaning of Section 77 BSA

Section 77 explains how particular categories of official documents may be proved in court. Different types of documents require different forms of official authentication or publication.

For example, a government notification may be proved through departmental records certified by the head of the relevant department or through a document purporting to have been printed by order of the government. Similarly, proceedings of Parliament or a State Legislature may be proved through the prescribed legislative records or authorised publications.

The section is important because the fact that a document appears to be official does not automatically establish that it has been proved in the manner required by law. The party relying on the document must identify the applicable category and follow the relevant method of proof.

Essential Features of Section 77 BSA

1. Government Acts, orders and notifications

Clause (a) concerns Acts, orders and notifications of the Central Government, State Governments, their departments and Union territory Administrations.

Such documents may be proved through either of the following methods:

• Departmental records certified by the head of the relevant department.
• A document purporting to have been printed by order of the relevant government.

The clause recognises two alternative methods of proof. A party should identify the appropriate method based on the nature and form of the document being relied upon.

Example: If a dispute concerns whether a government notification authorised a particular official to exercise a statutory power, the notification may be proved using one of the methods recognised by clause (a).

2. Proceedings of Parliament and State Legislatures

Clause (b) specifies the methods for proving the proceedings of Parliament or a State Legislature.

These proceedings may be proved through:

• The journals of the relevant legislative body.
• Published Acts or abstracts.
• Copies purporting to have been printed by order of the government concerned.

Example: Where the proceedings of a State Legislature become relevant in a legal dispute, the party relying on them may produce the relevant journal or an authorised publication recognised by the provision.

3. Proclamations, orders and regulations published in the Official Gazette

Clause (c) concerns proclamations, orders or regulations issued by the President of India, a State Governor, or the Administrator or Lieutenant Governor of a Union territory.

Also Read: Section 76 BSA: Proof of Documents by Certified Copies

These documents may be proved through copies or extracts contained in the Official Gazette.

Example: If a dispute concerns a proclamation issued by a competent constitutional authority, the relevant Official Gazette publication may be used to prove the proclamation in accordance with clause (c).

The section specifically identifies the Official Gazette as the relevant method for this category of documents.

4. Acts of foreign executives and proceedings of foreign legislatures

Clause (d) addresses the Acts of the Executive and the proceedings of the Legislature of a foreign country.

These may be proved through:

• Journals published under the authority of the foreign country.
• Journals commonly received as authoritative in that country.
• A copy certified under the seal of the country or sovereign.
• Recognition of the relevant document in a Central Act.

The appropriate method depends on the nature of the foreign document and the circumstances in which it is tendered as evidence.

5. Proceedings of municipal and local bodies

Clause (e) deals with the proceedings of a municipal or local body in a State.

Such proceedings may be proved by:

• A copy certified by the legal keeper of the proceedings; or
• A printed book purporting to have been published under the authority of the relevant body.

Example: If the proceedings of a municipal body are relevant to a dispute, a copy certified by the official legally responsible for keeping those proceedings may be produced.

The provision recognises the role of the legal keeper of the record in authenticating the copy.

6. Other classes of public documents from foreign countries

Clause (f) concerns public documents of other classes in foreign countries.

Such documents may be proved through the original or a copy certified by the legal keeper of the document. Where a certified copy is used, the provision requires a certificate under the seal of a Notary Public, an Indian Consul or a diplomatic agent confirming that the copy was duly certified by the officer having legal custody of the original.

The character of the document must also be proved according to the law of the foreign country.

This requirement is important because a court may need to determine whether a foreign document qualifies as a public document under the law applicable to it.

Summary Table: Methods of Proof Under Section 77 BSA

Clause	Category of document	Prescribed method of proof
(a)	Central and State Government Acts, orders and notifications	Departmental records certified by the department head, or a document purporting to be printed by government order
(b)	Proceedings of Parliament or a State Legislature	Legislative journals, published Acts or abstracts, or copies purporting to be printed by government order
(c)	Proclamations, orders and regulations issued by specified constitutional authorities	Copies or extracts in the Official Gazette
(d)	Acts of foreign executives and proceedings of foreign legislatures	Authorised or commonly received journals, sealed certified copies, or recognition in a Central Act
(e)	Proceedings of municipal or local bodies in a State	Copy certified by the legal keeper or an authorised printed book
(f)	Other classes of foreign public documents	Original or legally certified copy, prescribed authentication certificate and proof of the document’s character under foreign law

Important Case Laws on Proof of Official Documents

The following decisions concern the corresponding provision of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. They remain useful for understanding the principles behind Section 77 BSA, but they are not direct interpretations of the BSA provision.

1. Rajesh Agrawal v. State of Bihar and Another

Court: Patna High Court

Decision date: 11 September 1998

Facts: The case concerned a government notification allegedly authorising a District Supply Officer to search and seize business premises. The notification itself had not been properly produced on the record, and the State sought to rely on the claimed authorisation.

Legal principle: The Court considered the statutory method for proving government notifications under Section 78 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. It held that merely referring to a notification in a counter-affidavit was insufficient where the required mode of proof had not been followed.

The Court explained that the relevant government order or notification had to be proved through a method recognised by the statute. In the circumstances, the absence of the notification in the prescribed form meant that the claimed authorisation had not been established.

Relevance to Section 77 BSA: The case illustrates the importance of properly proving government orders and notifications. A party relying on an official notification should produce it through a legally recognised method rather than assume that a reference to it is sufficient.

2. Union of India v. Nirmal Singh

Citation: AIR 1987 All 83

Court: Allahabad High Court

Also Read: Section 75 BSA: Certified Copies of Public Documents

Decision date: 5 March 1986

Facts: The dispute concerned the validity of a dismissal order and whether the General Manager who issued it had been delegated the necessary authority. The Union of India relied on copies of government rules and related documents.

Legal principle: The Court distinguished between a document that may qualify as secondary evidence and a document that has been properly proved. It explained that government rules or orders could be proved through the statutory methods, including departmental certification or publication under government authority.

A mechanically reproduced copy was not sufficient merely because it appeared to reproduce the original. The required statutory conditions for proof had to be satisfied.

Relevance to Section 77 BSA: The judgment highlights the importance of using the prescribed methods to establish the contents and official character of government orders or rules. It also demonstrates that the rules concerning secondary evidence and the specific modes of proving official documents must be considered together.

Difference Between Sections 76 and 77 BSA

Sections 76 and 77 concern different aspects of proving documentary evidence.

Basis	Section 76 BSA	Section 77 BSA
Subject	Proof of documents by production of certified copies	Proof of other official documents
Main purpose	Permits certified copies to prove the contents of public documents or parts of them	Prescribes methods for proving specified categories of official documents
Scope	Certified copies of public documents	Government orders, legislative proceedings, Official Gazette material, local-body proceedings and specified foreign public documents
Practical question	Can a certified copy be used to prove the contents of a public document?	What method should be used to prove this particular category of official document?
Corresponding provision under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872	Section 77	Section 78

Section 76 provides a general rule for proving the contents of public documents through certified copies. Section 77 identifies particular methods for proving specified categories of official documents.

Difference Between Section 77 and Section 78 BSA

The phrase “Presumptions as to Documents” is the heading of the group of provisions that begins after Section 77. It is not the heading of Section 77 itself.

Section 77 deals with methods of proving official documents. Section 78 begins the provisions dealing with presumptions and specifically addresses the presumption as to the genuineness of certified copies.

Basis	Section 77 BSA	Section 78 BSA
Subject	Proof of other official documents	Presumption as to genuineness of certified copies
Function	Identifies prescribed methods of proof	Establishes a statutory presumption in specified circumstances
Main focus	How a particular official document may be proved	When a qualifying certified copy or document is presumed genuine
Corresponding provision under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872	Section 78	Section 79

These sections should not be confused. A prescribed method of proof under Section 77 is different from a presumption of genuineness under Section 78.

Difference Between Section 77 BSA and Section 78 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872

Section 77 BSA corresponds to Section 78 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

The earlier provision addressed methods for proving official documents, including government orders, legislative proceedings, foreign legislative or executive records, and municipal proceedings. Section 77 carries forward this essential framework with terminology adapted to India’s current constitutional and administrative structure.

For example, the BSA expressly refers to the Central Government’s Ministries and Departments, State Government departments and Union territory Administrations. It also identifies proclamations, orders and regulations issued by the President, State Governors and specified Union territory authorities, with proof through the Official Gazette.

The core principle remains that the method of proof depends on the category of official document.

Important Points for Law Students and Judiciary Aspirants

• Section 77 BSA deals with the proof of other official documents.
• It corresponds to Section 78 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
• Clause (a) concerns government Acts, orders and notifications.
• Clause (b) concerns proceedings of Parliament and State Legislatures.
• Clause (c) concerns specified proclamations, orders and regulations proved through the Official Gazette.
• Clause (d) concerns Acts of foreign executives and proceedings of foreign legislatures.
• Clause (e) concerns proceedings of municipal and local bodies in a State.
• Clause (f) concerns other classes of foreign public documents and their prescribed authentication.
• The method of proof depends on the category of document.
• Section 77 concerns methods of proof, while Section 78 BSA concerns the presumption as to genuineness of certified copies.
• Rajesh Agrawal v. State of Bihar illustrates the importance of properly proving a government notification.
• Union of India v. Nirmal Singh explains why the statutory requirements for proving government rules and orders must be followed.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

1. What is Section 77 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023?

Section 77 specifies how particular categories of public and official documents may be proved in court, including government orders, legislative proceedings, Official Gazette material, municipal proceedings and certain foreign public documents.

2. Which section of the Indian Evidence Act corresponds to Section 77 BSA?

Section 77 BSA corresponds to Section 78 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

3. How can a government notification be proved under Section 77 BSA?

Under clause (a), a government order or notification may be proved through departmental records certified by the head of the relevant department or through a document purporting to have been printed by order of the relevant government.

4. How can proceedings of Parliament or a State Legislature be proved?

Clause (b) permits proof through the journals of the relevant legislative body, published Acts or abstracts, or copies purporting to have been printed by order of the government concerned.

5. How can proclamations and orders issued by specified constitutional authorities be proved?

Under clause (c), proclamations, orders or regulations issued by the President, a State Governor, or the Administrator or Lieutenant Governor of a Union territory may be proved through copies or extracts contained in the Official Gazette.

6. Does Section 77 deal with presumptions as to documents?

No. Section 77 deals with proof of other official documents. The heading “Presumptions as to Documents” begins the subsequent group of provisions, starting with Section 78 BSA.

7. What is the difference between Section 77 and Section 78 BSA?

Section 77 identifies methods of proving specified official documents. Section 78 deals with the presumption as to genuineness of certified copies, subject to its statutory conditions.

8. Which cases are useful for understanding Section 77 BSA?

Rajesh Agrawal v. State of Bihar (Patna High Court, 11 September 1998) and Union of India v. Nirmal Singh, AIR 1987 All 83, are useful decisions concerning the statutory methods for proving government notifications, rules and orders under the predecessor Evidence Act.

Conclusion

Section 77 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 establishes specific methods for proving different categories of official documents. It addresses government Acts and notifications, legislative proceedings, Official Gazette publications, foreign government and legislative records, municipal proceedings and other foreign public documents. The provision corresponds to Section 78 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Its practical importance lies in ensuring that official documents are proved through the legally recognised method applicable to their category. It should be read alongside Sections 74, 75 and 76 BSA and distinguished from Section 78, which begins the statutory provisions on presumptions as to documents.

dfsad