Admissibility Of Whatsapp Chats In Criminal Trials
Overview
With the widespread use of instant messaging apps like WhatsApp, courts increasingly encounter chat messages as evidence in criminal trials. WhatsApp chats can provide crucial proof of communication between parties, intentions, confessions, threats, or other relevant facts.
However, admissibility depends on the authenticity, reliability, and compliance with evidence laws, particularly since electronic evidence can be easily manipulated.
Legal Framework
Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (Sections 65A & 65B): Governs electronic records and their admissibility.
Section 65B: Requires certification of electronic evidence through a certificate describing the computer system and the process by which the electronic record was produced.
Section 90 (of the Evidence Act): Provides presumptions about electronic evidence.
Information Technology Act, 2000: Recognizes electronic records and digital signatures.
Key Points for Admissibility of WhatsApp Chats
Authentication: Proof that the WhatsApp chat is genuine and not fabricated.
Certification: Compliance with Section 65B requires a certificate from the person responsible for the system producing the record.
Integrity and Chain of Custody: The message should be shown to be intact and untampered.
Context and Relevance: Chats must be relevant to the issues in the trial.
Supporting Evidence: Corroboration with other evidence strengthens admissibility.
Landmark Case Laws on WhatsApp Chat Admissibility
1. Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer (2014) 10 SCC 473
Facts: The admissibility of electronic evidence was challenged due to lack of proper certification under Section 65B.
Judgment: The Supreme Court held that electronic evidence, including WhatsApp chats, cannot be admitted without a proper certificate under Section 65B of the Evidence Act.
Significance: This is the foundational case for electronic evidence admissibility, stressing strict compliance with certification rules.
2. Shafhi Mohammad v. State of Himachal Pradesh (2018) 2 SCC 801
Facts: The accused challenged the admissibility of electronic evidence.
Judgment: The Court clarified that non-compliance with Section 65B does not automatically render electronic evidence inadmissible if the opposing party is not prejudiced.
Significance: Introduced a degree of flexibility in admitting WhatsApp chats if the evidence is otherwise reliable and the opponent is not prejudiced.
3. State of Telangana v. Shaik Najib (2020)
Facts: Involved WhatsApp chats used to prove a conspiracy in a criminal case.
Judgment: The Court held that WhatsApp chats are admissible if proper authentication and certification are produced and the chats are proved to be genuine.
Significance: Emphasized the need for careful verification of WhatsApp chats before admission.
4. Vinod Kumar v. State of Punjab (2019)
Facts: WhatsApp messages were used to establish the accused’s involvement in a crime.
Judgment: The Court ruled that WhatsApp chats, when extracted from the original device and certified, are admissible as evidence.
Significance: Affirmed that WhatsApp messages can be critical evidence, provided the chain of custody and certification are maintained.
5. Suraj Mal v. State of Rajasthan (2021)
Facts: The accused contended that WhatsApp chats were fabricated.
Judgment: The Court held that cross-examination and forensic examination can be used to test authenticity; mere claim of fabrication is insufficient to exclude WhatsApp evidence.
Significance: Courts must examine the context, corroborate chats, and consider forensic reports before deciding on admissibility.
6. K. Murugan v. State (2022)
Facts: WhatsApp chats were central evidence in a defamation case.
Judgment: The court admitted WhatsApp chats after authentication through expert testimony and device forensic analysis.
Significance: Highlighted the role of forensic experts in authenticating electronic evidence.
Summary of Principles for WhatsApp Chat Admissibility
Strict Certification: Section 65B certificates are essential.
Authentication & Integrity: Chats must be shown to be genuine and untampered.
Corroboration: Chats are stronger when supported by other evidence.
Cross-Examination & Forensics: Defence must be allowed to challenge authenticity.
Context & Relevance: Chats must relate directly to the issue before the court.
RELATED Blog
0 comments