Recoverable Document vs Original Document

So, suppose Ram files a suit against his ex-employee, Rakesh, for allegedly passing on company secrets to a rival. Ram wants to prove he gave Rakesh confidential documents. The original confidential documents are with Ram, but he somehow has photocopied them. Rakesh denies the allegations and claims no such documents exist. What can Ram do to prove this? Will the court accept the photocopied documents as evidence, or will Rakesh get away with his claim? This is where Section 61 to 65 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and the provisions of the Bombay Stamp Act (BSA) come into play. The court will now examine whether the photocopied documents are recoverable documents that fall under the purview of Section 62-65 of the Evidence Act. What's the legal remedy here?