All India Bar Examination (AIBE) 2-II Previous Year Question Papers with Answers

The least accurate statement about primary and secondary evidence is:

E: Section 63 provides an exhaustive definition of secondary evidence.

Explanation:

Section 63 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, indeed provides some guidelines and rules regarding secondary evidence, but it does not provide an exhaustive definition of secondary evidence. Instead, Section 63 outlines various situations and conditions under which secondary evidence may be admissible to prove the contents of a document when the primary evidence (the original document) is not available or cannot be produced. It provides rules for the admissibility of secondary evidence, but it doesn't attempt to provide a comprehensive definition of secondary evidence.

Statements A, B, C, and D are generally accurate:

A: The contents of documents can be proved either by primary or secondary evidence. This is true, as primary evidence is preferred when available, but secondary evidence can be used when the primary evidence is unavailable or inadmissible.

B: There are certain prescribed circumstances where secondary evidence can be used to prove a document. This is accurate; Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act specifies situations in which secondary evidence can be admitted.

C: Primary evidence affords the greatest certainty of facts in question. This is generally true because primary evidence consists of the original document or the best available evidence.

D: Secondary evidence concerning a document may not be provided when the original is found to be inadmissible. This is accurate; if the original document is inadmissible due to some legal reason, secondary evidence may also be rendered inadmissible.

In summary, statement E is the least accurate because Section 63 of the Indian Evidence Act does not provide an exhaustive definition of secondary evidence but rather outlines rules for its admissibility.