Indian Evidence Law | Updated 20 October 2026

Section 67 Evidence Act: Proof of Signature and Handwriting under BSA Section 65

When a document is said to have been signed or handwritten by a particular person, the party relying on it must establish that person's signature or handwriting. This rule appeared in Section 67 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and is now found in Section 65 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA).

Current law: The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 came into force on 1 July 2024. Section 65 of the BSA corresponds to Section 67 of the former Indian Evidence Act. Under the BSA's repeal and savings provisions, pending proceedings immediately before commencement continue under the earlier Act as applicable.

1. Statutory provision: Section 67 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872

The original provision was titled "Proof of signature and handwriting of person alleged to have signed or written document produced." Its text stated:

If a document is alleged to be signed or to have been written wholly or in part by any person, the signature or the handwriting of so much of the document as is alleged to be in that person's handwriting must be proved to be in his handwriting.

The section required proof of the alleged author's handwriting or signature. Merely producing a document does not, where authorship is disputed, establish that the named person wrote or signed it.

2. Current provision: Section 65 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023

Section 65, BSA, carries forward the same substantive rule: the signature or handwriting attributed to a person must be proved to be that person's handwriting. It applies whether the alleged writing is the entire document or only a particular part.

Read the official Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (India Code PDF), particularly Sections 39, 41, 65, 66, 67 and 72.

3. How can a disputed signature or handwriting be proved?

Depending on the facts, the court may consider one or more recognised forms of proof:

  • Testimony of the writer or signatory: the person may acknowledge making the signature or writing.
  • Witnesses with direct knowledge: a witness who saw the document signed or written may testify about the act.
  • Opinion of a handwriting expert: expert opinion is relevant under Section 39 of the BSA, subject to judicial evaluation.
  • Opinion of a person acquainted with the handwriting: Section 41 of the BSA recognises relevant opinion from a person familiar with the alleged writer's handwriting.
  • Comparison by the court: Section 72 of the BSA permits comparison with handwriting or signatures admitted or proved to the court's satisfaction.
  • Other admissible surrounding evidence: correspondence, admissions and circumstances may assist in establishing authorship, depending on their admissibility and probative value.

There is no universal requirement that every disputed signature must be proved through a forensic expert. The weight of each form of evidence depends on the circumstances.

4. Proof of signature is not the same as proof of the contents

Proving that a person signed a document is distinct from proving that every statement in the document is true, that the transaction was valid, or that all formal execution requirements were met. Questions about primary and secondary evidence, attestation, authenticity, admissibility and evidentiary weight may arise separately.

5. Documents requiring attestation

For documents that the law requires to be attested, Section 67 of the BSA (corresponding to former Section 68 of the Evidence Act) lays down additional rules for proving execution. Proof of a signature under BSA Section 65 does not automatically replace those requirements. The special rules for registered documents and wills must be considered where applicable.

6. Electronic signatures and electronic records

Electronic signatures are dealt with specifically by Section 66 of the BSA (formerly Section 67A of the Evidence Act). The admissibility of electronic records may also involve Sections 61 to 63 of the BSA, including the certificate requirements applicable to computer output. A scanned image of a handwritten signature and a cryptographic electronic signature may present different questions of proof.

7. Practical examples

Disputed signature on an agreement

If one party denies signing an agreement, the party relying on it may produce a person who witnessed the signing, admitted comparison specimens, relevant expert evidence, or other admissible material connecting the signature to the alleged signatory.

Handwritten entries in a register

Where entries are alleged to have been made by a particular employee, evidence from a colleague familiar with the employee's writing, records of routine practice, and expert comparison may be relevant. Whether the entries prove the asserted facts remains a separate issue.

8. Frequently asked questions

Is Section 67 of the Indian Evidence Act still the current provision?

For proceedings governed by the new evidence law, the corresponding rule is Section 65 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023. The earlier Act remains relevant under the applicable savings provisions for qualifying pending proceedings.

Can a court compare signatures?

Yes. Section 72 of the BSA provides for comparison of signatures, writing or seals with those admitted or proved to the court's satisfaction. Such comparison must be assessed with appropriate care.

Does registration alone prove every disputed signature?

No. Registration and associated records can be relevant, but their effect depends on the document, statutory presumptions, any applicable attestation rules, and the issues disputed in the case.

9. Official legal references

Editorial note: This article explains the general statutory position as at 20 October 2026. The applicable procedure and evidentiary requirements depend on the facts and the stage of the proceedings.