History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v4.c63.216.1

v4.c63.216.1

Yāj. II. 91, Nār. IV. 146 and Kāt. 312 (q. by Aparārka p. 687) prescribe that when a document is in another country or when it is illegibly written, when it is lost or its letters have become indistinct (by lapse of time or other causes) or it has been stolen or is crushed or burnt or shattered into pieces, another document may be caused to be written (if both parties agree): but if they do not agree and the contents have to be proved or if the executant denies his signature, then Nār. IV. 142 and Kāt. (282 q. by Sm. C. II. p. 63) say that time may be given to bring it from the foreign country or the contents may be proved by the evidence of the attesting witnesses or of the scribe or of those that have seen it. This shows that the smṛti law required the production of the document itself as primary evidence, but allowed secondary evidence only in exceptional cases.⁴⁴² If a document belonging to one man is produced by another the latter has to explain his custody of it⁴⁴³ (Vyāsa q. by Aparārka p. 690, Sm. C. II. 66). Kāt. (308 q. by Sm. C. II. p. 65) says⁴⁴⁴ that just as the reflection of a person or thing made in a mirror is seen as if it were real though it is unreal, so clever people can fabricate documents resembling (the genuine writing of a person). Vyāsa (in Aparārka p. 688, Sm. C. II. 65) and Bṛ. (S. B. E. vol. 33 p. 307 vv.