About the Author. Professor K D Gaur, former Vice-Chancellor, Professor and Head, Post-Graduate Department of Law, Utkal University Bhubaneshwar. terney.info - download Indian Evidence Act, (Lawmann's) book online at best prices in india on terney.info Read Indian Evidence Act, (Lawmann's) book . A Critical Commentary Covering Emerging Issues and International Developments - This section-wise commentary on the law of evidence offers a unique.
|Language:||English, Spanish, Arabic|
|Genre:||Science & Research|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Registration Required]|
Indian Evidence Act, (1 of ): (With Exhaustive Case Law) The site Book Review Author interviews, book reviews, editors' picks, and more. Indian Evidence Act by Nageshwar Rao from terney.info Only Genuine Home · Books. Indian Evidence Act (English, Hardcover, Nageshwar Rao). Share . amend the law of Evidence;. It is hereby This Act may be called the Indian Evidence Act,. The facts that other entries made by A in the same book are.
The facts that, after the commission of the alleged crime, he absconded, or was in possession of property or the proceeds of property acquired by the crime, or attempted to conceal things which were or might have been used in committing it, are relevant.
The facts that, shortly after the alleged rape, she made a complaint relating to the crime, the circumstances under which, and the terms in which, the complaint was made, are relevant. The fact that, without making a complaint, she said that she had been ravished is not relevant as conduct under this section, though it may be relevant as a dying declaration under section 32, clause 1 , or as corroborative evidence under section The fact that, soon after the alleged robbery, he made a complaint relating to the offence, the circumstances under which, and the terms in which, the complaint was made, are relevant.
The fact that he said he had been robbed, without making any complaint, is not relevant, as conduct under this section, though it may be relevant as a dying declaration under section 32, clause 1 , or as corroborative evidence under section COMMENTS Ground for rejection of testimony of eye witness The conduct of an eye witness in non-disclosing the incident to anybody for a number of days, is highly unnatural one and is sufficient to reject his testimony; Ganpat Kondiba Chavan v.
State of Maharashtra, 2 Crimes 38 Bom. It is well settled that the conduct of a witness in not disclosing the incident to person s whom he must have met after the incident is indicative of the fact that he had not seen the accident; Ganpat Kondiba Chavan v. Role of motive in an offence If motive is proved, the case of prosecution becomes more easier to connect accused to the alleged incident; P.
Narayana v. Normally there is a motive behind every criminal act; Barikanoo v.
State of Uttar Pradesh, 1 Crimes All. When motive is not sine qua non Where the ocular evidence is very clear and convincing and the role of the accused person in the crime stands clearly established, establishment of motive is not a sine qua non for proving the prosecution case; Yunis alias Kariya v.
It is well settled that where the direct evidence regarding the assault is worthy of the credence and can be believed, the question of motive becomes more or less academic. Sometimes the motive is clear and can be proved and sometimes the motive is shrouded in the mystery and it is very difficult to locate the same. If, however, the evidence of eye witnesses is credit-worthy and is believed by the court which has placed implicit reliance on them, the question whether there is any motive or not becomes wholly irrelevant; Raja v.
State, 2 Crimes Motive is a thing primarily known to the accused himself and it may not the possible for the prosecution in each and every case to find out the real motive behind the crime; Barikanoo v.
It is well established that where there is an eyewitness account regarding the incident, the motive loses all its importance; Barikanoo v. Illustrations a The question is, whether a given document is the Will of A. The state of A's property and of his family at the date of the alleged Will may be relevant facts. The position and relations of the parties at the time when the libel was published may be relevant facts as introductory to the facts in issue.
The particulars of a dispute between A and B about a matter unconnected with the alleged libel are irrelevant, though the fact that there was a dispute may be relevant if it affected the relations between A and B. The fact that, soon after the commission of the crime, A absconded from his house, is relevant, under section 8, as conduct subsequent to and affected by facts in issue.
The fact that, at the time when he left home, he had sudden and urgent business at the place to which he went, is relevant, as tending to explain the fact that he left home suddenly. The details of the business on which he left are not relevant, except in so far as they are necessary to show that the business was sudden and urgent. This statement is a relevant fact as explanatory of C's conduct, which is relevant as a fact in issue.
B's statement is relevant as explanatory of a fact which is part of the transaction. The cries of the mob are relevant as explanatory of the nature of the transaction. Things said or done by conspirator in reference to common design.
Illustration Reasonable ground exists for believing that A has joined in a conspiracy to wage war against the 1[Government of India].
Comments Existence of conspiracy If prima facie evidence of existence of a conspiracy is given and accepted, the evidence of acts and statements made by anyone of the conspirators in furtherance of the common object is admissible against all; Jayendra Saraswati Swamigal v.
Object Section 10 has been deliberately enacted in order to make acts and statements of a co-conspirator admissible against the whole body of conspirators, because of the nature of crime; Badri Rai v. It had noting to do with carrying the conspiracy into effect; Mirza Akbar v.
When facts not otherwise relevant become relevant. Illustrations a The question is, whether A committed a crime at Calcutta on a certain day. The fact that, on that day, A was at Lahore is relevant.
The fact that, near the time when the crime was committed, A was at a distance from the place where it was committed, which would render it highly improbable, though not impossible, that he committed it, is relevant.
The circumstances are such that the crime must have been committed either by A, B, C or D, every fact which shows that the crime could have been committed by no one else and that it was not committed by either B, C or D, is relevant. In suits for damages, facts tending to enable Court to determine amount are relevant.
Facts relevant when right or custom is in question. Illustration The question is, whether A has a right to a fishery.
Facts showing existence of state of mind, or of body or bodily feeling. It is proved that he was in possession of a particular stolen article. The fact that, at the same time, he was in possession of many other stolen articles is relevant, as tending to show that he knew each and all of the articles of which he was in possession, to be stolen. The fact that, at the time of its delivery, A was possessed of a number of other pieces of counterfeit coin is relevant.
The fact that A had been previously convicted of delivering to another person as genuine a counterfeit coin knowing it to be counterfeit is relevant.
The facts that the dog had previously bitten X, Y, and Z, and that they had made complaints to B, are relevant. The fact that A had accepted other bills drawn in the same manner before they could have been transmitted to him by the payee if the payee had been a real person, is relevant, as showing that A knew that the payee was a fictitious person. The facts that there was no previous quarrel between A and B, and that A repeated the matter complained of as he heard it, are relevant, as showing that A did not intend to harm the reputation of B.
The fact that, at the time when A represented C to be solvent, C was supposed to be solvent by his neighbours and by persons dealing with him, is relevant, as showing that A made the representation in good faith. The fact that public notice of the loss of the property had been given in the place where A was, is relevant, as showing that A did not in good faith believe that the real owner of the property could not be found.
Threatening letters previously sent by A to B may be proved, as showing intention of the letters. Expressions of their feeling towards each other shortly before or after the alleged cruelty, are relevant facts. Statements made by A during his illness as to his symptoms, are relevant facts.
Statements made by A as to the state of his health at or near the time in question are relevant facts. The fact that B was habitually negligent about the carriages which he let to hire, is irrelevant. The fact that A, on other occasions shot at B is relevant, as showing his intention to shoot B. The fact that A was in the habit of shooting at people with intent to murder them, is irrelevant.
The fact that he said something indicating an intention to commit that particular crime is relevant. The fact that he said something indicating a general disposition to commit crimes of that class is irrelevant. Facts bearing on question whether act was accidental or intentional. The facts that A lived in several houses successively, each of which he insured, in each of which a fire occurred, and after each of which fires A received payment from a different insurance office, are relevant, as tending to show that the fires were not accidental.
He makes an entry showing that on a particular occasion he received less than he really did receive. The question is, whether this false entry was accidental or intentional.
The facts that other entries made by A in the same book are false, and that the false entry is in each case in favour of A, are relevant. The question is, whether the delivery of the rupee was accidental. The facts that, soon before or soon after the delivery to B, A delivered counterfeit rupees to C, D and E are relevant, as showing that the delivery to B, was not accidental. Existence of course of business when relevant. Illustrations a The question is, whether a particular letter was despatched.
The facts that it was the ordinary course of business for all letters put in a certain place to be carried to the post, and that particular letter was put in that place, are relevant. The facts that it was posted in due course, and was not returned through the Dead Letter Office, are relevant.
Admission defined. Comment s Admissibility is substantive evidence of the fact Admissibility is substantive evidence of the fact admitted while a previous statement used to contradict a witness does not become substantive evidence and merely serves the purpose of throwing doubt on the veracity of the witness; Bishwanath Prasad v. Admission by party to proceeding or his agent. Statements made by— 1 party interested in subject-matter.
Admissions by persons whose position must be proved as against party to suit. Illustration A undertakes to collect rents for B. B sues A for not collecting rent due from C to B. A denies that rent was due from C to B.
A statement by C that he owed B rent is an admission, and is a relevant fact as against A, if A denies that C did owe rent to B. Admissions by persons expressly referred to by party to suit. Illustration The question is, whether a horse sold by A to B is sound. A says to B—"Go and ask C.
Proof of admissions against persons making them, and by or on their behalf. Illustrations a The question between A and B is, whether a certain deed is or is not forged, A affirms that it is genuine, B that it is forged.
A may prove a statement by B that the deed is genuine, and B may prove a statement by A that the deed is forged; but A cannot prove a statement by himself that the deed is genuine, nor can B prove a statement by himself that the deed is forged. Evidence is given to show that the ship was taken out of her proper course. A produces a book kept by him in the ordinary course of his business, showing observations alleged to have been taken by him from day to day, and indicating that the ship was not taken out of her proper course.
A may prove these statements, because they would be admissible between third parties, if he were dead, under section 32, clause 2.
He produces a letter written by himself and dated at Lahore on that day, and bearing the Lahore post-mark of that day.
The statement in the date of the letter is admissible, because, if A were dead, it would be admissible under section 32, clause 2. He offers to prove that he refused to sell them below their value. A may prove these statements, though they are admissions, because they are explanatory of conduct influenced by facts in issue. He offers to prove that he asked a skilful person to examine the coin, as he doubted whether it was counterfeit or not, and that the person did examine it and told him it was genuine.
A may prove these facts for the reasons stated in the last preceding illustration. Comments Submission of a letter not containing anything either in favour or against but simply a statement of original defendant, then such letter cannot be taken as that of a substituted defendant, confronting with admissions; Salil Kumar Roy v. When oral admissions as to contents of documents are relevant.
When oral admissions as to contents of electronic records are relevant. Admissions in civil cases, when relevant.
Confession caused by inducement, threat or promise, when irrelevant in criminal proceeding. Confession to police officer not to be proved. Confession by accused while in custody of police not to be proved against him. How much of information received from accused may be proved.
Confession made after removal of impression caused by inducement, threat or promise relevant. Confession otherwise relevant not to become irrelevant because of promise of secrecy, etc.
Consideration of proved confession affecting person making it and others jointly under trial for same offence. The Court may consider the effect of this confession as against B. This statement may not be taken into consideration by the Court against A, as B is not being jointly tried. COMMENTS Accused's confession cannot be used against co-accused The statement of the accused leading to the discovery, or the informatory statement amounting to confession of the accused, cannot be used against the co-accused with the aid of section ; Kamal Kishore v.
State Delhi Administration , 2 Crimes Del. Admissions not conclusive proof, but may estop. Such statements are relevant whether the person who made them was or was not, at the time when they were made, under expectation of death, and whatever may be the nature of the proceeding in which the cause of his death comes into question.
Illustrations a The question is, whether A was murdered by B; or A dies of injuries received in a transaction in the course of which she was ravished. The question is, whether she was ravished by B; or The question is, whether A was killed by B under such circumstances that a suit would lie against B by A's widow. Statements made by A as to the cause of his or her death, referring respectively to the murder, the rape, and the actionable wrong under consideration, are relevant facts.
An entry in the diary of a deceased surgeon, regularly kept in the course of business, stating that, on a given day he attended A's mother and delivered her of a son, is a relevant fact. A statement in the diary of a deceased solicitor, regularly kept in the course of business, that, on a given day, the solicitor attended A at a place mentioned, in Calcutta, for the purpose of conferring with him upon specified business, is a relevant fact.
A letter written by a deceased member of a merchant's firm, by which she was chartered, to their correspondents in London to whom the cargo was consigned, stating that the ship sailed on a given day from Bombay harbour, is a relevant fact. A letter from A's deceased agent to A, saying that he had received the rent on A's account and held it at A's orders, is a relevant fact. The statement of a deceased clergyman that he married them under such circumstances that the celebration would be a crime, is relevant.
The fact that a letter written by him is dated on that day, is relevant. A protest made by the Captain, whose attendance cannot be procured, is a relevant fact. A statement by A, a deceased headman of the village, that the road was public, is a relevant fact. A statement of the price, made by a deceased banya in the ordinary course of his business is a relevant fact. A statement by A that B was his son, is a relevant fact. A letter from A's deceased father to a friend, announcing the birth of A on a given day, is a relevant fact.
An entry in a memorandum-book by C, the deceased father of B, of his daughter's marriage with A on a given date, is a relevant fact. The question is as to the similarity of the caricature and its libellous character. The remarks of a crowd of spectators on these points may be proved. Relevancy of certain evidence for proving, in subsequent proceeding, the truth of facts therein stated. Provided— that the proceeding was between the same parties or their representatives in interest; that the adverse party in the first proceeding had the right and opportunity to cross-examine; that the questions in issue were substantially the same in the first as in the second proceeding.
Illustration A sues B for Rs. The entries are relevant, but are not sufficient, without other evidence, to prove the debt. Unbound sheets of paper are not books of account and cannot be relied upon; Dharam Chand Joshi v. Books of account being only corroborative evidence must be supported by other evidence; Dharam Chand Joshi v.
Relevancy of entry in public 1[record or an electronic record] made in performance of duty. Relevancy of statements in maps, charts and plans. Relevancy of statement as to fact of public nature, contained in certain Acts or notifications. Relevancy of statements as to any law contained in law-books.
What evidence to be given when statement forms part of a conversation, document, electronic record, book or series of letters or papers. Previous judgments relevant to bar a second suit or trial. Relevancy of certain judgments in probate, etc.
Such judgment, order or decree is conclusive proof— that any legal character, which it confers accrued at the time when such judgment, order or decree came into operation; that any legal character, to which it declares any such person to be entitled, accrued to that person at the time when such judgment, 1[order or decree] declares it to have accrued to that person; 3[order or decree] declares it to have accrued to that person;" that any legal character which it takes away from any such person ceased at the time from which such judgment, 1[order or decree] declared that it had ceased or should cease; 3[order or decree] declared that it had ceased or should cease;" and that anything to which it declares any person to be so entitled was the property of that person at the time from which such judgment, 1[order or decree] declares that it had been or should be his property.
Relevancy and effect of judgments, orders or decrees, other than those mentioned in section Illustration A sues B for trespass on his land. B alleges the existence of a public right of way over the land, which A denies. The existence of a decree in favour of the defendant, in a suit by A against C for a trespass on the same land in which C alleged the existence of the same right of way, is relevant, but it is not conclusive proof that the right of way exists.
Judgments, etc. Illustrations a A and B separately sue C for a libel which reflects upon each of them. C in each case says, that the matter alleged to be libellous is true, and the circumstances are such that it is probably true in each case, or in neither.
A obtains a decree against C for damages on the ground that C failed to make out his justification. The fact is irrelevant as between B and C.
B denies that C is A's wife, but the court convicts B of adultery. Afterwards, C is prosecuted for bigamy in marrying B during A's lifetime. C says that she never was A's wife. The judgment against B is irrelevant as against C.
A afterwards sues C for the cow, which B had sold to him before his conviction. As between A and C, the judgment against B is irrelevant. The existence of the judgment is relevant, as showing motive for a crime.
The previous conviction is relevant as a fact in issue. The fact that B prosecuted A for libel and that A was convicted and sentenced is relevant under section 8 as showing the motive for the fact in issue. Fraud or collusion in obtaining judgment, or incompetency of Court, may be proved. Opinions of experts. Such persons are called experts. Illustrations a The question is, whether the death of A was caused by poison. The opinions of experts as to the symptoms produced by the poison by which A is supposed to have died are relevant.
The opinions of experts upon the question whether the symptoms exhibited by A commonly show unsoundness of mind, and whether such unsoundness of mind usually renders persons incapable of knowing the nature of the acts which they do, or of knowing that what they do is either wrong or contrary to law, are relevant.
Another document is produced which is proved or admitted to have been written by A. The opinions of experts on the question whether the two documents were written by the same person or by different persons, are relevant. Comments Conflict of opinion of Experts When there is a conflict of opinion between the experts, then the Court is competent to form its own opinion with regard to signatures on a document; Kishan Chand v.
Expert opinion admissibility Requirement of expert evidence about test firing to find out whether double barrel gun is in working condition or not, not necessary; Jarnail Singh v. The evidence of a doctor conducting post mortem without producing any authority in support of his opinion is insufficient to grant conviction to an accused; Mohd Zahid v. Opinion to be received with great caution The opinion of a handwriting expert given in evidence is no less fallible than any other expert opinion adduced in evidence with the result that such evidence has to be received with great caution; Ram Narain v.
Facts bearing upon opinions of experts. Illustrations a The question is, whether A was poisoned by a certain poison. The fact that other persons, who were poisoned by that person, exhibited certain symptoms which experts affirm or deny to be the symptoms of that poison, is relevant.
The fact that other harbours similarly situated in other respects, but where there were no such sea-walls, began to be obstructed at about the same time, is relevant. COMMENTS tc "COMMENTS" Admissibility The science of identification of footprints is not a fully developed science and therefore if in a given case, evidence relating to the same is found satisfactory it may be used only to reinforce the conclusions as to the identity of a culprit already arrived at on the basis of other evidence; Mohd.
Aman v. State of Rajasthan, 4 Supreme Opinion as to handwriting, when relevant. Illustration The question is, whether a given letter is in the underwriting of A, a merchant in London.
B is a merchant in Calcutta, who has written letters addressed to A and received letters purporting to be written by him. C is B's clerk, whose duty it was to examine and file B's correspondence. D is B's broker, to whom B habitually submitted the letters purporting to be written by A for the purpose of advising him thereon. Opinion as to existence of right or custom, when relevant. Illustration The right of the villagers of a particular village to use the water of a particular well is a general right within the meaning of this section.
Opinions as to usages, tenets, etc. Opinion on relationship, when relevant. Provided that such opinion shall not be sufficient to prove a marriage in proceedings under the Indian Divorce Act, 4 of or in prosecutions under section , , or of the Indian Penal Code 45 of Illustrations a The question is, whether A and B were married.
The fact that they were usually received and treated by their friends as husband and wife, is relevant. The fact that A was always treated as such by members of the family, is relevant.
Comments Contradiction in evidence of relationship of witness of triffle nature, not material in a partition suit; Gowhari Das v. Grounds of opinion, when relevant.
Illustration An expert may give an account of experiments performed by him for the purpose of forming his opinion. In civil cases character to prove conduct imputed, irrelevant. In criminal cases, previous good character relevant.
Previous bad character not relevant, except in reply. Character as affecting damages. Fact judicially noticeable need not be proved. Facts of which Court must take judicial notice. In all these cases, and also on all matters of public history, literature, science or art, the Court may resort for its aid to appropriate books or documents of reference.
If the Court is called upon by any person to take judicial notice of any fact, it may refuse to do so, unless and until such person produces any such book or document as it may consider necessary to enable it to do so. Provided that the Court may, in its discretion, require the facts admitted to be proved otherwise than by such admissions.
Proof of facts by oral evidence. Oral evidence must be direct. Provided that the opinions of experts expressed in any treatise commonly offered for sale, and the grounds on which such opinions are held, may be proved by the production of such treatises if the author is dead or cannot be found, or has become incapable of giving evidence, or cannot be called as a witness without an amount of delay or expense which the Court regards as unreasonable: Provided also that, if oral evidence refers to the existence or condition of any material thing other than a document, the Court may, if it thinks fit, require the production of such material thing for its inspection.
Proof of contents of documents. Primary evidence. Illustration A person is shown to have been in possession of a number of placards, all printed at one time from one original. Any one of the placards is primary evidence of the contents of any other, but no one of them is primary evidence of the contents of the original. Secondary evidence. Illustrations a A photograph of an original is secondary evidence of its contents, though the two have not been compared, if it is proved that the thing photographed was the original.
Presence of document proved from the facts pleaded - Allowing secondary evidence not illegal; Sobha Rani v. Tape-recorded statements are admissible in evidence; K. Mohan v. Shivalingaiah v.
Proof of documents by primary evidence. Cases in which secondary evidence relating to documents may be given. In cases a , c and d , any secondary evidence of the contents of the document is admissible. In case b , the written admission is admissible. In case e or f , a certified copy of the document, but no other kind of secondary evidence, is admissible.
In case g , evidence may be given as to the general result of the documents by any person who has examined them, and who is skilled in the examination of such documents. Special provisions as to evidence relating to electronic record.
Admissibility of electronic records. Rules as to notice to produce. Proof of signature and handwriting of person alleged to have signed or written document produced. Proof of execution of document required by law to be attested. Proof where no attesting witness found.
Admission of execution by party to attested document. Proof when attesting witness denies the execution. Proof of document not required by law to be attested. Comparison of signature, writing or seal with others admitted or proved. The Court may direct any person present in Court to write any words or figures for the purpose of enabling the Court to compare the words or figures so written with any words or figures alleged to have been written by such person.
Proof as to verification of digital signature. Public documents. Private documents. Certified copies of public documents. Proof of documents by production of certified copies. Proof of other official documents. Copies of public documents, to be as good as original documents in certain cases. Presumption as to genuineness of certified copies. 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. Presumption as to documents produced as record of evidence. Presumption as to Gazettes, newspapers, private Acts of Parliament and other documents.
Presumption as to Gazettes in electronic forms. Presumption as to document admissible in England without proof of seal or signature. Presumption as to maps or plans made by authority of Government. Presumption as to collections of laws and reports of decisions. Presumption as to powers-of-attorney. Presumption as to certified copies of foreign judicial records.
Presumption as to books, maps and charts. Presumption as to telegraphic messages. Presumption as to electronic messages. Presumption as to due execution, etc. Presumption as to documents thirty years old.
This Explanation applies also to 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 is proper. The mortgagor is in possession.
This Explanation applies also to section 81A. Evidence of terms of contracts, grants and other dispositions of property reduced to form of documents. Exception 2. Explanation 3. Illustrations a If a contract be contained in several letters, all the letters in which it is contained must be proved. The contract mentions the fact that B had paid A the price of other indigo contracted for verbally on another occasion. Oral evidence is offered that no payment was made for the other indigo.
The evidence is admissible. Oral evidence is offered of the payment. Exclusion of evidence of oral agreement. Proviso 1. In considering whether or not this proviso applies, the Court shall have regard to the degree of formality of the document: Proviso 3.
Proviso 4. Proviso 5. Provided that the annexing of such incident would not be repugnant to, or inconsistent with, the express terms of the contract: Proviso 6.
The goods are shipped in a particular ship which is lost. The fact that that particular ship was orally excepted from the policy, cannot be proved.
The fact that, at the same time, an oral agreement was made that the money should not be paid till the thirty-first March, cannot be proved. After section 65, the following sections shall be inserted, namely:- 65A. The contents of electronic records may be proved in accordance with the provisions of section 65B. Admissibility of electronic records. After section 67, the following section shall be inserted, namely :- "67A.
Proof as to digital signature. Except in the case of a secure digital signature, if the digital signature of any subscriber is alleged to have been affixed to an electronic record the fact that such digital signature is the digital signature of the subscriber must be proved;" After section 73, the following section shall be inserted, namely :- "73A.
Proofs as to verification of digital signature. In order to ascertain whether a digital signature is that of the person by whom it purports to have been affixed, the court may direct- a that person or the Controller or the Certifying Authority to produce the Digital Signature Certificate; b any other person to apply the public key listed in the Digital Signature Certificate and verify the digital signature purported to have been affixed by the person.
After section 81, the following section shall be inserted, namely :- "81A. Presumption as to Gazettes in electronic forms. The Court shall presume the genuineness of every electronic record purporting to be the Official Gazette, or purporting to be electronic record directed by any law to be kept by any person, if such electronic record is kept substantially in the form required by law and is produced from proper custody. After section 85, the following sections shall be inserted, namely:- "85A.
Presumption as to electronic agreements. The Court shall presume that every electronic record purporting to be an agreement containing the digital signature of the parties was so concluded by affixing the digital signature of the parties. Presumption as to electronic record and digital signatures. Presumption as to Digital Signature Certificates. The Court shall presume, unless contrary is proved, that the information listed in a Digital Signature Certificate is correct, except for information specified as subscriber information which has not been verified, if the certificate was accepted by the subscriber.
After section 88, the following section shall be inserted, namely :- 88A. Presumption as to electronic messages.