Email Authentication And Section 65B
1. Email Authentication
Email authentication is the process of verifying the origin, content, and integrity of an email to ensure it is genuine and has not been tampered with. In legal proceedings, especially in India, emails are considered electronic records under the Information Technology Act, 2000.
To admit an email as evidence in court, it must be:
Proven that the email originated from the claimed sender.
Shown that the email was sent and received without alteration.
Authenticated under the relevant legal provisions (mainly Section 65B of the Evidence Act).
Email authentication generally involves examining headers, digital signatures, and metadata to establish these facts.
2. Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Section 65B deals with the admissibility of electronic records as evidence in courts. It is crucial because electronic evidence is not like traditional paper evidence — it needs a special procedure to prove its authenticity.
Key Points of Section 65B:
It allows the production of a computer-generated electronic record as evidence.
Requires a certificate (called Section 65B certificate) from a person responsible for the operation of the relevant device.
The certificate must state:
The nature of the electronic record.
The device used to produce it.
That the device was operating properly.
The date and time of the record.
Without this certificate, electronic evidence is generally not admissible.
3. Landmark Cases Explaining Section 65B and Email Authentication
Case 1: Anvar P.V. vs. P.K. Basheer and Others (2014) 10 SCC 473
Facts: The Supreme Court examined whether electronic records (including emails, digital documents) could be admitted without complying with Section 65B.
Held: Section 65B certificate is mandatory for electronic evidence to be admissible. Without it, such evidence cannot be relied upon.
Significance: This is the landmark ruling affirming the mandatory requirement of the certificate for electronic evidence, impacting email evidence too.
Case 2: Shafhi Mohammad vs. State of Himachal Pradesh (2018) 2 SCC 801
Facts: The appellant challenged the rejection of electronic evidence that did not have a proper Section 65B certificate.
Held: The Supreme Court clarified that the requirement under Section 65B is mandatory but not absolute; trial courts should give parties a chance to provide the certificate.
Significance: Courts should not reject electronic evidence outright if the certificate is not presented initially but should provide an opportunity to cure the defect.
Case 3: Arjun Panditrao Khotkar vs. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal (2020) 2 SCC 672
Facts: In a criminal case, the court examined the requirements for the admissibility of electronic evidence, including emails and digital records.
Held: Reiterated the Anvar judgment’s principle that Section 65B certificate is mandatory. However, it emphasized that the certificate should be from a person responsible for the device and should accompany the electronic record.
Significance: Strengthened the strict approach to electronic evidence authentication and certification.
Case 4: State of Punjab vs. Amritsar Beverages Ltd. (2012) 3 SCC 658
Facts: This case dealt with the admissibility of digital evidence including email communications.
Held: The court accepted the authenticity of emails based on the evidence of the computer system and the logs maintained, although Section 65B was not explicitly discussed (since this was before Anvar).
Significance: Early case that paved the way for accepting emails and digital records as evidence.
Case 5: Tomaso Bruno & Anr vs. State of U.P. (2015) 7 SCC 165
Facts: The court considered the correctness of digital evidence without proper Section 65B certification.
Held: The court held that electronic records without a Section 65B certificate are inadmissible.
Significance: Reinforced the mandatory nature of Section 65B for the electronic evidence.
Case 6: Dattu @ Jayprakash S/o. Ganpatrao Bhamburkar vs. State of Maharashtra (2018) 7 SCC 273
Facts: The case involved examination of WhatsApp messages and emails as evidence.
Held: The Supreme Court elaborated that electronic evidence must follow Section 65B, and that the origin and integrity of such messages should be established.
Significance: Extended the principles of email authentication to other forms of electronic communication.
Summary of Legal Position
Emails and electronic records are admissible in Indian courts as evidence.
The authenticity and integrity of such emails must be proved using Section 65B.
A proper Section 65B certificate is mandatory to admit such evidence unless the court grants an opportunity to produce it.
Courts look at the reliability of the device, method of capturing the record, and the credibility of the certificate.
Practical Implication for Email Evidence
When submitting emails as evidence, always attach the Section 65B certificate from the person responsible for managing the email server or electronic record.
Maintain proper logs, timestamps, and metadata of emails.
Courts scrutinize emails’ authenticity through headers, digital signatures, and associated metadata.
RELATED Blog
0 comments