Section 92 Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023: Presumption as to documents thirty years old

Section 92 of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023: Presumption as to documents thirty years old

Official Bare Act Text

Override / Mandate Mens Rea (Intent) Actus Reus (Conduct) Punishment Limitation Monetary

Where any document, purporting or proved to be thirty years old, is produced from any custody which the Court in the particular case considers proper, the Court may presume that the signature and every other part of such document, which purports to be in the handwriting of any particular person, is in that person's handwriting, and, in the case of a document executed or attested, that it was duly executed and attested by the persons by whom it purports to be executed and attested.

Explanation. — —The Explanation to section 80 shall also apply to this section.

Illustrations

(a) A has been in possession of landed property for a long time. He produces from his custody deeds relating to the land showing his titles to it. The custody shall be proper.

(b) A produces deeds relating to landed property of which he is the mortgagee. The mortgagor is in possession. The custody shall be proper.

(c) A, a connection of B, produces deeds relating to lands in B's possession, which were deposited with him by B for safe custody. The custody shall be proper.

Statutory Defined Terms in this Section: (Click any term for official legal definition)

Court Sec 2(1)(a) Document Sec 2(1)(b) Evidence Sec 2(1)(c) Proved Sec 2(1)(f) Secondary Evidence Sec 58

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 92

Section 92 embodies the historic 'Thirty-Year-Old Documents Rule', empowering the Court to presume that a document thirty years old, produced from proper custody, was duly executed and attested by the persons by whom it purports to be executed.

Thirty-Year Vintage Standard: The document must be thirty years old from the date of execution to the date it is tendered in evidence.
Proper Custody Requirement: Must be produced from custody which the court considers natural and proper under the circumstances of the case.
Presumption of Due Execution: The court may presume the handwriting, signature, execution, and attestation of the document without calling witnesses.

Key Landmark Precedents:

Lakhi Baruah v. Padma Kanta Kalita (1996) 8 SCC 357: The Supreme Court held that the presumption under Section 90 IEA (Section 92 BSA) is discretionary and applies only to original documents, not to copies; the document must come from proper custody free from suspicion.
Harihar Prasad Singh v. Deonarain Prasad (AIR 1956 SC 305): Affirmed that proper custody means custody in which the document would naturally be kept; production from suspicious custody destroys the presumption.

Courtroom Practice & Strategic Litigation Guidance:

Never attempt to invoke Section 92 on a photocopy of a 30-year-old document. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that Section 92 applies exclusively to original ancient deeds produced from natural family or institutional custody.