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 is founded upon the maxim .omnia proesumuntur rite esse acta, that is, all acts are presumed to be rightly done. According to the section when a certified copy of an original document is produced before the court as a secondary evidence the court is bound to presume it to be genuine and it is admissible as evidence. The presumption that the court has to draw that a certified copy of a document is genuine and also that the officer signed in his official character, is also correct. This presumption is liable to be rebutted, if the document in question is not certified copy. If anyone alleges that the certified copy is not genuine the burden of proving the same shall lie on him.
Under the section the court shall presume a certified copy to be genuine if it purports to be duly certified by officer of the Central or State Government or by any officer of the Government of the State of Jammu and Kashmir who is duly authorized by the Central Government. Secondly, such document is substantially in the form and purports to be executed in that manner directed by law. Admissibility of certified copies of documents should be gone into at the time of marking the same as exhibits and not at the time of receiving of document.
“The presumption drawn in favour of official certificate is prima facie not conclusive. They may be shown to be incorrect”. Certified copy of incomplete judgment is inadmissible in evidence. When the relevant dates are shown both in words and figures the possibility of interpolation in dates is almost eliminated.