Electronic Evidence Under The Indian Evidence Act
Electronic Evidence under the Indian Evidence Act
What is Electronic Evidence?
Electronic evidence refers to any evidence that is generated, stored, or transmitted in electronic form. This includes emails, computer files, digital documents, electronic records, audio or video recordings, SMS, and any data stored electronically.
Legal Framework in India:
The Indian Evidence Act, 1872, was initially not designed to deal with electronic records. However, after the advent of technology, certain amendments and related laws now govern electronic evidence:
Section 65A & 65B of the Indian Evidence Act were introduced by the Information Technology Act, 2000 (IT Act) amendments to specifically address electronic evidence.
Section 65A: Admissibility of electronic records.
Section 65B: Conditions under which electronic records are admissible without further proof or oral evidence.
IT Act, 2000 also defines electronic records and legalizes digital signatures, further facilitating the use of electronic evidence.
Key Provisions for Electronic Evidence
Section 65B(1): Any information contained in an electronic record, which is printed on a paper, stored, recorded, or copied in optical or magnetic media produced by a computer, shall be deemed to be a document.
Section 65B(2): To prove electronic evidence, a certificate (65B(4)) by a person responsible for the operation of the device must accompany the electronic record.
The certificate must specify details like the origin of the electronic record, the device used to produce it, and that it was properly maintained.
Landmark Cases on Electronic Evidence in India
1. State (NCT of Delhi) vs. Navjot Sandhu (2005) (The Parliament Attack Case)
Supreme Court Judgment
The Supreme Court accepted electronic evidence, including intercepted telephone conversations, as admissible in court.
Emphasized strict compliance with Section 65B of the Evidence Act.
Ruled that electronic evidence must be supported by a proper certificate under Section 65B(4).
The case set a precedent for accepting electronic evidence in terrorism-related cases.
2. Anvar P.V. vs. P.K. Basheer & Ors. (2014) - (Supreme Court)
Key Point:
The Supreme Court clarified that electronic records are admissible only if they meet the conditions under Section 65B.
Oral evidence to prove electronic records is not sufficient.
The absence of a certificate under Section 65B(4) makes electronic evidence inadmissible.
This case made Section 65B compliance mandatory for electronic evidence.
3. Bramhaputra Cracker and Polymer Ltd vs. A.K. Roy (2013) (Gauhati High Court)
The court observed that for electronic evidence to be admissible, the device or system that generated the electronic record must be reliable.
Stress on the authenticity and integrity of the electronic record.
The court accepted emails and SMS as valid electronic evidence after verification.
4. Shafhi Mohammad vs. State of Himachal Pradesh (2018)
Although primarily about confessions, the Supreme Court touched upon electronic evidence.
The Court held that electronic evidence is admissible but must be scrutinized carefully for authenticity.
Reiterated that a certificate under Section 65B is mandatory.
The case emphasized fair trial rights and due process when relying on electronic evidence.
5. Arjun Panditrao Khotkar vs. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal & Anr. (2020)
Supreme Court clarified that non-compliance of Section 65B does not necessarily mean the electronic evidence is inadmissible in all cases.
It differentiated between primary and secondary evidence.
If the original electronic record is not available but a secondary copy is, then Section 65B certificate is mandatory for admissibility.
Allowed flexibility in cases where the original evidence cannot be produced.
6. Anil Verma vs. Director of Income Tax (2008)
The Delhi High Court held that electronic evidence like CDs and emails could be considered relevant and admissible if produced along with proper authentication.
Highlighted the importance of maintaining the chain of custody for electronic records.
7. State of Punjab vs. Gurmit Singh (1996) (Before amendment but important)
This case dealt with the admissibility of voice samples and electronic interceptions.
The Court ruled that interception of telephonic conversation without following due procedure is inadmissible.
Established the importance of lawful interception as a precondition for electronic evidence.
Summary Points
Section 65B is the cornerstone for admitting electronic evidence.
A proper certificate under Section 65B(4) is almost always mandatory.
Authenticity and integrity of electronic evidence are critical.
Courts scrutinize chain of custody for electronic records.
The Supreme Court has gradually allowed flexibility but with safeguards.
Electronic evidence is now an integral part of modern Indian litigation.
RELATED Blog
0 comments