Presumption as to genuineness of certified copies
Section 79 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 deals with presumption as to genuineness of certified copies. The Court shall presume [to be genuine] every document purporting to be a certificate, certified copy or other document, which is by Law declared to be admissible as evidence of any particular fact and which purports to be duly certified by any officer [of the Central Government or of a State Govern The Act came into force on 01 Sep 1872. Repealed by section 170 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (47 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under it.
The Court shall presume [to be genuine] every document purporting to be a certificate, certified copy or other document, which is by Law declared to be admissible as evidence of any particular fact and which purports to be duly certified by any officer [of the Central Government or of a State Government, or by any officer [in the State of Jammu and Kashmir] who is duly authorized thereto by the Central Government]:
Provided that such document is substantially in the form and purports to be executed in the manner directed by law in that behalf. The Court shall also presume that any officer by whom any such document purports to be signed or certified, held, when he signed it, the official character which he claims in such paper.
Section 79, The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (Act 1 of 1872).
Now in the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam
BSA 78 Presumption as to genuineness of certified copies Text carried over almost unchanged 95%
Measured by comparing the text of the two provisions, not taken from an official correspondence table — there is no machine-readable one. See both texts side by side before relying on it.
Both regimes are live. The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force. We never redirect one to the other.
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Manik vs The State of Maharashtra Home Department Secretary
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When a dead body is recovered and subjected to autopsy and necrotomic evidence is adduced to establish cause of death, failure to prove that the dead body is of the person allegedly murdered by the accused must have fatal and adverse consequence on the prosecution case. The case of an untraceable dead body is different from a case where the dead body is traced and evidence is adduced to prove the identity of the deceased. In the latter case, upon failure to prove identity, the prosecution cannot be permitted to advance a case that the dead body is untraceable. However, this principle applies only when the prosecution itself has put forth the case that the dead body was recovered. In such circumstances, when once identification of the dead body as that of the alleged victim based on fingerprint test is reversed by the High Court, in the absence of appeal by the State or the victim, it cannot be said that the dead body is that of the alleged victim, either for holding the accused guilty of murder under Section 302 IPC or under Section 304 IPC. (Justice C.T. Ravikumar's view, which represents the majority position on this specific issue)
On this section: Relevancy of facts forming part of same transaction; applied in context of accepting certified court orders
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Judgments citing this section
These may be obiter dicta or a precedent, for you to study. These are the judgments where this section is quoted.
-
… The Hon'ble Judge went on to further observe in paragraph 19 of his opinion that both the public documents were exhibited by the prosecution without a protest from the defence. Thereafter, the Hon'ble Judge has, in addition to taking note of section 79 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, which mandates the Court to presume that public documents are genuine, also relied on section 35 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and observed that the documents made ante litem motam can be relied upon safely when such documents are admissible under section ![]( page 50 Picture …
-
… Such documents were verified from the portal of the authorities and petitioner had no reasons to disbelieve such documents as there is a statutory presumption of its genuineness under Section 79 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. It is submitted that the impugned order is an outcome of the purported exercise to save the proper officer of customs, inasmuch as, the proper officer of customs assessed the shipping bills and issued "Let Export Orders" without raising any objection against the value of the …
-
… Nanjundappa were residing together as husband and wife. The Family Court on meticulous appreciation of oral and documentary evidence has giving the finding that the marriage certificate issued by the competent authority is a public document and thus under Section 79 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 there is presumption that the document is genuine. The Family Court has further recorded a finding the document at Ex.P1 being a public document does not require further proof. The appellant has failed to rebut the said presumption. The appellant has not examined any independent …
Questions about Section 79
What have the courts held on Section 79 of the Indian Evidence Act?
Manik vs The State of Maharashtra Home Department Secretary (25 Sep 2024) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Relevancy of facts forming part of same transaction; applied in context of accepting certified court orders.
How do I find court cases under Section 79 of the Indian Evidence Act?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: IEA 79, section 79 IEA, section 79 of the Indian Evidence Act. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 1 reported judgment on this section is set out on this page, beginning with Manik vs The State of Maharashtra Home Department Secretary (25 Sep 2024).
What should I read with Section 79 of the Indian Evidence Act, and has it changed?
For anything done on or after 1 July 2024 the provision to read is BSA 78 (Presumption as to genuineness of certified copies), which replaced it; conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under this section.
When did Section 79 of the Indian Evidence Act come into force?
Section 79 of the Indian Evidence Act, cited as IEA 79, came into force on 01 Sep 1872, having been enacted on 15 Mar 1872. It is no longer in force.
Other sections of this Act
- 32. Cases in which statement of relevant fact by person who is dead or cannot be found, etc., is relevant1207 words
- 14. Facts showing existence of state of mind, or of body of bodily feeling1080 words
- 92. Exclusion of evidence of oral agreement809 words
- 8. Motive, preparation and previous or subsequent conduct773 words
- 65B. Admissibility of electronic records743 words
- 3. Interpretation-clause667 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Recovered from the consolidated text published by India Code (item e51341fa-7528-4327-9a57-5d194e16db6f). This page is not a substitute for legal advice.