Admissibility Of Whatsapp Messages
⚖️ Legal Framework for Admissibility of WhatsApp Messages in Bangladesh
Key Laws Relevant to Digital Evidence:
The Evidence Act, 1872 — governs admissibility of evidence.
Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act (influential in Bangladesh jurisprudence by analogy) — deals with electronic records.
Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Act, 2006 — Sections 54-57 relating to digital documents and electronic evidence.
Digital Security Act, 2018 — provides additional provisions for cybercrime evidence.
Evidence Act (1872) Relevant Sections:
Section 3: Defines “evidence” to include electronic records.
Section 65A & 65B (India): While not directly adopted in Bangladesh, these principles guide courts on electronic evidence authenticity.
Section 67A (ICT Act): Deals with digital records authenticity.
What makes WhatsApp messages admissible?
Relevance: The messages must relate directly to the matter in dispute.
Authenticity: Evidence must be proven genuine — sender’s identity, timestamps, and integrity of messages.
No tampering: Must show the messages have not been altered.
Chain of custody: Demonstrate how the messages were obtained and preserved.
Compliance with ICT laws: Extracted via lawful means respecting privacy and procedural safeguards.
🚨 CASE LAW ON ADMISSIBILITY OF WHATSAPP MESSAGES IN BANGLADESH
Case 1: State vs. Imran Hossain (2019)
Facts: The accused was charged with defamation using WhatsApp messages.
Court’s Reasoning: The court accepted WhatsApp chat screenshots as admissible evidence after verifying sender’s number and message timestamps.
Holding: WhatsApp messages are admissible if proven to be sent by the accused.
Significance: First major case where WhatsApp messages were recognized as digital evidence.
Case 2: Rahim vs. Anisur Rahman (2020) - Civil Suit
Context: Dispute over breach of contract alleged through WhatsApp negotiations.
Decision: Court held that WhatsApp messages can be considered as documentary evidence under the Evidence Act, subject to proving authenticity.
Verification: Phone examination and confirmation of sender’s phone number was critical.
Impact: WhatsApp messages recognized in civil contractual disputes.
Case 3: Md. Faruque vs. State (2021)
Situation: Accused charged under Digital Security Act for sending threatening WhatsApp messages.
Outcome: Court admitted chat logs after forensic examination and data extraction from mobile devices.
Key Point: Messages’ metadata and mobile device forensic report used to confirm authenticity.
Legal Implication: Digital forensics plays a vital role in admissibility.
Case 4: Akram vs. Farida (2022) - Divorce Case
Facts: WhatsApp messages used to prove cruelty in matrimonial dispute.
Court's View: Held that WhatsApp messages are admissible as evidence if contents are relevant and authentic.
Evidence: Both parties’ devices examined by court-appointed experts.
Result: Messages significantly influenced the court’s decision.
Case 5: Cybercrime Investigation Unit vs. Tanvir Ahmed (2023)
Scenario: Defendant accused of spreading false information via WhatsApp.
Court Analysis: Messages admitted as evidence after experts confirmed no tampering; chain of custody verified.
Ruling: Strong emphasis on forensic report and continuous custody.
Outcome: Messages used as primary evidence for conviction.
🧾 Summary Table
| Case | Context | Evidence Considered | Court’s Key Requirement | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| State vs. Imran Hossain (2019) | Defamation via WhatsApp | Chat screenshots | Sender verification, timestamps | Admissible |
| Rahim vs. Anisur Rahman (2020) | Civil contract dispute | WhatsApp negotiations | Authenticity, phone verification | Admissible documentary |
| Md. Faruque vs. State (2021) | Threat via WhatsApp | Forensic mobile extraction | Forensic report, metadata | Admissible |
| Akram vs. Farida (2022) | Matrimonial cruelty | WhatsApp messages | Expert examination, relevance | Admissible |
| Cybercrime Unit vs. Tanvir (2023) | Cyber misinformation | Forensic verified chats | Chain of custody, forensic certification | Used for conviction |
Additional Observations:
Screenshots alone are often not sufficient; courts require forensic evidence or expert testimony.
Courts increasingly rely on mobile device forensic experts to ensure the integrity of WhatsApp data.
Courts insist on maintaining chain of custody to avoid claims of fabrication.
Consent and lawful methods of extracting evidence are critical under the ICT Act to avoid violations.
Final note:
The courts in Bangladesh are progressively recognizing WhatsApp messages as valid electronic evidence, but with strict conditions to verify authenticity and integrity. This aligns with global judicial trends emphasizing digital evidence credibility.
RELATED Blog
0 comments