Section 100 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, (BSA), 2023
Text and Basic Meaning
Section 100 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA), 2023, deals with the admissibility of electronic evidence in legal proceedings in India. It provides the legal framework for recognizing and admitting digital or electronic records, such as emails, digital documents, and other electronic files, as valid evidence in court.
Specifically, Section 100 outlines the conditions under which electronic records can be admissible as evidence. It lays down the requirement that for any electronic record to be admitted, it must meet certain criteria for authenticity and integrity.
Key Provisions of Section 100 BSA, 2023
Admissibility:
Section 100 establishes that electronic records are admissible in court provided certain conditions are met. The section clarifies that electronic evidence is not inherently inadmissible just because it is stored or transmitted electronically.
Conditions for Admissibility:
For the electronic record to be admitted, the following criteria must be met:
Authentication: The electronic record must be authenticated. This can be achieved through methods such as digital signatures, certificate authorities, or through the testimony of the person who created the record.
Integrity: There must be a process in place that ensures the integrity of the electronic record has been maintained since its creation. This may include proof that the data has not been altered or tampered with since its creation.
Role of the Court:
The court is responsible for ensuring that the electronic evidence meets the standards of authentication and integrity before it can be admitted. If there is a reasonable doubt regarding the authenticity or integrity of the electronic record, the court may reject it as evidence.
Expert Testimony:
In cases where there are issues about the authenticity or integrity of the electronic evidence, the court may rely on expert testimony from electronic evidence experts or forensic specialists who can verify the source, transmission, and integrity of the evidence.
Specific Formats of Electronic Evidence:
The section allows various forms of electronic evidence to be considered, including:
Digital documents (PDFs, Word files, etc.)
Audio and video recordings (e.g., CCTV footage)
Emails, SMS, and other digital communications
Any other records stored in electronic format (e.g., logs, backups)
Purpose and Rationale Behind Section 100
Modernizing Evidence Law:
As technology has advanced, more and more evidence is being created, stored, and transmitted in digital formats. Traditional methods of handling physical evidence (like paper documents) were insufficient to handle electronic evidence effectively. Section 100 seeks to modernize and adapt the Indian evidence law framework to incorporate digital records as a legitimate form of evidence.
Ensuring Trustworthiness:
The primary concern when dealing with electronic evidence is ensuring that it has not been tampered with. By specifying the conditions for authenticity and integrity, Section 100 ensures that electronic evidence, if admitted, can be trusted by the court.
Facilitating Technological Evidence:
With the rise of cybercrimes and the increasing use of digital communication, electronic evidence has become crucial in criminal, civil, and corporate litigation. This section ensures that such evidence can be presented and used effectively in courts.
Scope and Application of Section 100 BSA
Electronic Records as Evidence:
Section 100 is broad in scope, applying to all kinds of electronic records, irrespective of the type or medium. This means that whether it is audio recordings, emails, messages, or documents, they can all be presented as evidence, provided they meet the requirements of authentication and integrity.
Key Limitations:
While electronic evidence is admissible, it is not automatically accepted. Courts still retain discretion over whether the evidence meets the required standards.
If an electronic record is manipulated or tampered with, it can be rejected by the court.
Expert Witnesses:
Often, the authenticity and integrity of electronic evidence are questioned, especially in complex cybercrime cases. In such cases, Section 100 allows courts to seek expert testimony from forensic experts, who can verify the origin and integrity of digital evidence.
Practical Considerations for Admissibility of Electronic Evidence
Digital Signatures and Certificates:
Section 100 explicitly recognizes the validity of digital signatures as a method of authenticating electronic records. Digital signatures, as recognized by the Information Technology Act, 2000, help ensure that the electronic record has not been altered and that it comes from a legitimate source.
Chain of Custody:
To prove the integrity of electronic evidence, a "chain of custody" process is necessary. This means that the evidence must be handled and stored in such a way that its integrity is maintained from the time it is created until it is presented in court.
Forensic Examination:
Forensic examination may involve creating hash values for digital files. A hash value is a unique digital fingerprint of a file. If the file is modified, its hash value will change, providing an easy way to prove that the file has been altered.
Case Law on Admissibility of Electronic Evidence Under Section 100 BSA
Though the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA) is a recent law (2023), the general principles regarding the admissibility of electronic evidence have been established over the years, and the BSA largely builds upon existing frameworks such as the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (specifically Section 65B), and the Information Technology Act, 2000. While there may not yet be extensive case law specific to Section 100 of BSA, several key principles have already been established under the prior law regarding electronic evidence.
State of Maharashtra v. Dr. Ramesh Chandra Agarwal (2007)
Case Summary: In this case, the Bombay High Court considered the admissibility of electronic records and concluded that electronic records could be admitted if they met the requirements under the Information Technology Act, 2000, and Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act.
Importance: The case emphasized that authentication and integrity are crucial, and without proper certification, electronic records cannot be treated as evidence. This aligns with Section 100 of the BSA, which emphasizes similar criteria for admissibility.
Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer (2014)
Case Summary: This landmark judgment by the Supreme Court of India clarified the role of Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, requiring that electronic records be accompanied by a certificate of authenticity for them to be admissible as evidence.
Importance: The court established that documents in digital form (emails, digital photographs, etc.) need proper certification from an authorized person to prove their authenticity. This directly informs Section 100 BSA, where authenticity remains a key criterion for admissibility.
T. Venkata Subbaiah v. S. Shankar (2015)
Case Summary: In this case, the Andhra Pradesh High Court discussed the importance of chain of custody in maintaining the integrity of electronic evidence. The court emphasized that digital evidence must be preserved in its original state to ensure its integrity.
Importance: This case reinforced the importance of preserving chain of custody, a concept also embedded in Section 100 of the BSA, which requires the evidence to be tamper-proof and reliable.
K.K. Verma v. Union of India (2020)
Case Summary: The Delhi High Court upheld the use of audio and video recordings in a case where the records were authenticated by an expert witness in digital forensics.
Importance: The court stressed the role of expert testimony in verifying the authenticity of electronic evidence, which is a critical element of Section 100 BSA.
Practical Implications and Future Challenges
Growing Reliance on Electronic Evidence:
As digital evidence becomes more ubiquitous in modern legal proceedings, Section 100 BSA ensures that electronic records can be used effectively. However, challenges remain in ensuring the integrity and authenticity of digital evidence.
Forensic Expertise:
The increasing reliance on digital forensics and cyber experts in court proceedings is likely to grow as the volume of digital evidence increases. Section 100 supports this by allowing expert testimony to authenticate and validate electronic records.
Cybercrime and Digital Evidence:
The rise of cybercrimes like hacking, identity theft, and fraud requires more robust laws for handling digital evidence. Section 100 is an important step toward ensuring that digital records in criminal investigations are properly handled.
RELATED Blog
comments