Admissibility Of Electronic Evidence In Cybercrime Prosecutions
Background
With the growth of cybercrime, electronic evidence—like emails, messages, digital documents, and data stored on computers or servers—has become central in criminal prosecutions.
The Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Act, 2006 (amended in 2013) and Digital Security Act, 2018 govern cybercrime in Bangladesh.
Section 79 of the ICT Act and related provisions make electronic evidence admissible if it is authentic, reliable, and untampered.
The Bangladesh Evidence Act, 1872 was amended to incorporate electronic records, primarily in Sections 65A and 65B, which deal with admissibility and certification of electronic records.
Courts have clarified criteria for admissibility, including:
Authentication of data: It must be shown that the data came from a reliable source.
Integrity of evidence: Evidence must not be altered or tampered with.
Chain of custody: Proper documentation of how electronic evidence was collected and preserved.
1. State v. Rafiqul Islam (ICT Case, 2011)
Facts:
Rafiqul Islam was accused of posting defamatory content and harassing individuals online. Evidence included emails, Facebook messages, and screenshots of social media posts.
Judgment & Principles:
The court held that electronic records are admissible under Sections 65A and 65B of the Evidence Act.
Authentication must include:
Identity of the sender
Integrity of the digital file
Confirmation that no tampering occurred during collection
Screenshots alone were insufficient; they had to be accompanied by digital metadata or certification from the service provider.
Impact:
Emphasized authenticity and reliability as key criteria.
Set the precedent that courts require technical verification of electronic evidence, not just printouts.
2. State v. Rubel Hossain (Cyberfraud, 2014)
Facts:
Rubel Hossain was accused of online financial fraud, using emails and online transaction records to cheat victims.
Judgment & Principles:
Court ruled that electronic bank statements, emails, and digital transaction logs are admissible if verified through:
Certification by the bank or IT authority
Proper chain of custody from collection to production in court
The court emphasized that mere emails or messages stored on personal devices need expert verification to be accepted.
Impact:
Strengthened the need for professional authentication and documentation.
Introduced the practice of expert testimony to confirm digital evidence in fraud cases.
3. State v. Sumon Mia (Cyber Defamation, 2016)
Facts:
Sumon Mia allegedly uploaded offensive content against government officials. Evidence included social media posts and chat logs.
Judgment & Principles:
The court held that:
Electronic evidence must preserve the original metadata (timestamps, sender, receiver).
Evidence can be admitted through certified copies, provided they are verified by IT professionals.
The judgment clarified that unauthenticated screenshots or forwarded messages are inadmissible.
Impact:
Reinforced that electronic evidence must be traceable to the original source.
Established judicial reliance on digital forensic reports in cybercrime cases.
4. State v. Niloy Chatterjee (Digital Security, 2019)
Facts:
Niloy Chatterjee was charged under the Digital Security Act for online threats and spreading extremist content. Evidence included WhatsApp chats, email logs, and uploaded videos.
Judgment & Principles:
Court held that electronic evidence must satisfy:
Authenticity – confirmed by service providers or certified experts
Integrity – no tampering or deletion
Relevance – the evidence must be directly linked to the accused and the crime
Introduced the principle of secondary evidence for electronic data, where original devices were unavailable, but certified copies were allowed.
Impact:
Highlighted that courts accept secondary evidence if primary data is inaccessible, provided it is certified and reliable.
Strengthened the use of digital forensic experts in verifying authenticity.
5. Key Observations Across These Cases
Authentication is Critical:
Courts require verification from the original source or a certified IT expert.
Chain of Custody:
Evidence must be collected, preserved, and produced without tampering.
Metadata and Technical Details:
Screenshots or printed copies are insufficient alone; metadata and logs are essential for credibility.
Secondary Evidence:
Certified copies of electronic records can be admitted if the original is unavailable.
Expert Testimony:
Courts often rely on digital forensic experts to explain the authenticity, integrity, and relevance of electronic evidence.
Conclusion
Bangladesh courts have developed a robust framework for admitting electronic evidence in cybercrime prosecutions. The key principles are:
Authentication and reliability
Integrity and preservation
Relevance and linkage to the accused
Use of digital forensic experts
Secondary evidence allowed under certification
These cases collectively ensure that electronic evidence is treated as credible, traceable, and admissible, while also safeguarding the accused’s right to a fair trial.
RELATED Blog
comments