How law determines the validity of a will: The legal principles in Sunjay Kapur case

“Facts remain true even when overlooked,” Aldous Huxley observed. This concept lies at the core of succession law: a Will is dismissed based on proof, not feelings and Indian legal tradition has consistently protected testamentary intention, from the upheaval of family disputes.

As per Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, a lawful Will needs to be (1) signed by the testator and (2) witnessed by two individuals who observed the testator's signature. The Supreme Court, through rulings, has consistently maintained that minor typographical mistakes, layout problems or stylistic imperfections do not invalidate a Will when the legal conditions are met.

The Court’s role is not to look for suspicion but to evaluate the document based on clear evidence of intent, ability and proper execution. This legal principle is explicitly shown in the timeline submitted to the Court in the Kapur case.

The List of Dates outlines a chain of custody: Sunjay Kapur directed the preparation of a draft; the draft was produced on 10 February 2025 using a prior family template; Sunjay examined it around 10 March instructed the inclusion of Safira and named Shradha Suri as executor; the document underwent revisions, until 17 March and was ultimately signed on 21 March in the presence of both attesting witnesses.

This continuous sequence is the type of documentary evidence that courts depend on to confirm the intention, behind a will. Philosopher John Locke maintained that property represents an extension of one’s autonomy. This concept is reflected in law: an individual holds the complete right to allocate their self-owned property according to their preference, even if this allocation upsets heirs. Courts refrain from altering Wills based on ideas of equity; they respect the testator’s autonomy provided the requirements, for execution are met.

Digital proof now constitutes an element of this investigation. The metadata in the Word document (created on February 10, 2025) and PDF (created on March 24, 2025), with WhatsApp logs indicating Sunjay accessed the signed Will at 5:01 pm on 24 March confirm the legitimacy of the procedure. Indian courts recognise these records if backed by Section 65B certificates — a fact regularly upheld in current case law.

The general philosophical and legal principle is straightforward: A Will holds validity not due to family consensus. Because the law acknowledges an individual's right to determine what happens to their estate. In the Kapur case, the evidence — traces, testimonies, metadata and witness statements — fully complies, with legal standards.

As Justice Holmes once said, “The life of the law has not been logic; it has been experience.” And experience shows that a Will grounded in clear facts, documented steps, and lawful execution withstands rhetoric, suspicion, and sentiment alike.