Exclusive HOLI Discounts!
Get Courses and Combos at Upto 50% OFF!
Upgrad
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More


(Guest)

Admissibility of carbon copy of document

 

carbon copy was made by one uniform process the same was primary evidence within the meaning of explanation 2 to Section 62 of the Evidence Act.

 
  The learned Sessions Judge felt that it would not be possible to secure her presence without undue delay, and therefore, permitted the prosecution to prove the certificate through PW-2 Dr. Kapila, who was conversant with her hand-writing and signature, he having worked with her for about two years. He stated that the carbon copy of the certificate Ex P-E was prepared by Dr. Vedwa by one process and bears her signature. The learned counsel for the appellant contended that this certificate was inadmissible in evidence since the prosecution has failed to prove that the original certifi- cate was lost and not available. Section 32 of the Evidence Act provides that when a statement, written or verbal, is made by a person in the discharge of professional duty whose attendance cannot be procured without an amount of delay, the same is relevant and admissible in evidence. Besides, since one carbon copy was made by one uniform process the same was primary evidence within the meaning of explanation 2 to Section 62 of the Evidence Act. Therefore the medical certificateEx. P-E was clearly admissible in evidence.

Supreme Court of India
Prithi Chand vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 17 January, 1989
Equivalent citations: 1989 AIR 702, 1989 SCR (1) 123


Learning

 0 Replies


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register