Admissibility Of Electronic Evidence
1. Introduction to Electronic Evidence
Electronic evidence refers to any information or data generated, sent, received, or stored in digital form that can be used in legal proceedings. Examples include:
Emails, chats, and messages
Digital documents and invoices
Social media content
CCTV footage
Mobile phone data and call records
The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 was amended by the Information Technology Act, 2000, specifically through Sections 65A and 65B, to make electronic records admissible as evidence in courts.
Key Requirements for Admissibility
Authenticity: Evidence must be proven to be genuine.
Integrity: Evidence must not be tampered with.
Reliability: Source and method of storage must be credible.
Certification: Section 65B requires a certificate of authenticity for electronic records.
2. Landmark Case Laws on Admissibility of Electronic Evidence
Case 1: State (NCT of Delhi) v. Navjot Sandhu (2005) – “Delhi Gang Rape Case”
Facts: The case involved electronic records, like mobile call logs and emails, as evidence.
Judgment: The Supreme Court emphasized the importance of proper authentication and certification of electronic records under Section 65B of the Evidence Act.
Significance: Courts clarified that mere printouts of electronic records without certification are generally inadmissible.
Case 2: Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer (2014)
Facts: The case dealt with the admissibility of a CD containing digital evidence in a criminal case.
Judgment: Supreme Court held that electronic evidence is admissible only if it meets Section 65B requirements.
Significance:
Certificates under Section 65B(4) are mandatory.
Evidence without such certification cannot be admitted in court.
Case 3: Shafhi Mohammad v. State of Himachal Pradesh (2018)
Facts: This case examined if electronic evidence without a Section 65B certificate could still be considered.
Judgment: The Supreme Court clarified that the mandatory certificate requirement is strict, and failure to produce it renders electronic evidence inadmissible.
Significance: Reinforced the Anvar P.V. principle, stressing strict compliance for electronic records.
Case 4: State of Punjab v. Amritsar Beverages Pvt. Ltd. (2006)
Facts: This case involved emails and digital invoices submitted as proof of tax liability.
Judgment: Court held that electronic evidence is admissible if it is proved to be genuine and reliable, even in civil matters.
Significance: Established that electronic records are valid in civil and commercial disputes, not just criminal cases.
Case 5: CBI v. Prasad Kumar (2010)
Facts: Emails and computer-generated logs were presented in a corruption case.
Judgment: The court allowed electronic records after verification by digital experts, emphasizing the importance of forensic examination.
Significance: Highlighted the role of expert testimony in establishing the authenticity of digital evidence.
Case 6: Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal (2020)
Facts: The case involved mobile phone call records as electronic evidence in a tax evasion dispute.
Judgment: Supreme Court reaffirmed that electronic evidence is admissible under Section 65B, even if generated by a third-party system, provided the certificate is furnished.
Significance: Strengthened the principle that admissibility depends on compliance with IT Act provisions, not just relevance.
Case 7: State of Maharashtra v. Dr. Praful B. Desai (2003)
Facts: Involved MRI and digital medical records as evidence.
Judgment: Court held that medical electronic records, if authentic, are admissible under Section 65A and 65B.
Significance: Expanded the scope of electronic evidence to include healthcare and scientific data.
3. Summary of Principles for Admissibility
Section 65A & 65B: Must comply for formal admissibility.
Certificate Requirement: Mandatory for electronic evidence in court.
Authentication: Printouts alone are insufficient.
Expert Testimony: May be used to prove integrity and reliability.
Scope: Applicable in criminal, civil, commercial, and medical cases.
✅ Key Takeaway: Electronic evidence is now as legally potent as traditional evidence, but strict adherence to statutory requirements is necessary, and courts are strict about authentication under Section 65B.
RELATED Blog
0 comments