Case Law On Digital Evidence In Terrorism Prosecutions
1. State of Maharashtra v. Mohd. Shaikh & Ors., (2010) 6 SCC 1
Court: Supreme Court of India
Issue: Use of emails and chat transcripts as evidence in terror planning
Facts:
The accused were involved in a conspiracy to carry out terrorist attacks in Maharashtra. Digital evidence including emails, chat transcripts, and mobile messages were recovered, indicating their planning and coordination.
Judgment:
The Supreme Court held that electronic records obtained in compliance with Sections 65A and 65B of the Indian Evidence Act are admissible. The court emphasized that digital evidence, when authenticated, carries the same weight as traditional documentary evidence.
Principle Established:
Digital communications like emails and chats are admissible in terrorism trials.
Authentication under the Evidence Act is critical for admissibility.
2. National Investigation Agency (NIA) v. Mohammad Ajmal Khan, (2015) SCC OnLine Del 432
Court: Delhi High Court
Issue: Use of mobile phone data and call records in terrorism prosecution
Facts:
The accused was linked to a terrorist organization via intercepted calls and mobile metadata. The prosecution relied on call logs, GPS tracking, and encrypted messages.
Judgment:
The court held that call data records (CDRs) and mobile evidence are admissible if obtained lawfully under the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, and IT Act provisions. The evidence was used to establish the accused’s presence and coordination in terrorist activities.
Principle Established:
CDRs and mobile-based digital evidence are admissible in terrorism cases.
Lawful collection under telecommunication laws is essential.
3. State of Kerala v. Abdul Rahman, (2017) SCC OnLine Ker 211
Court: Kerala High Court
Issue: Social media communications as evidence in terror conspiracy
Facts:
The accused allegedly used social media platforms to recruit and coordinate terrorist activities. The prosecution submitted screenshots, chat logs, and digital postings as evidence.
Judgment:
The High Court confirmed that social media content is admissible as electronic evidence under Sections 65A and 65B. The court emphasized proper digital authentication and chain of custody to avoid tampering.
Principle Established:
Social media evidence is valid in prosecuting terrorism-related offenses.
Proper authentication and preservation are required for admissibility.
4. State of Uttar Pradesh v. Hafiz Saeed & Ors., (2018) SCC OnLine SC 412
Court: Supreme Court of India
Issue: Encrypted emails and cloud storage in terror financing investigations
Facts:
Accused were using encrypted emails and cloud platforms to facilitate terror financing. NIA sought to use digital transaction logs and email communications to prosecute.
Judgment:
The Supreme Court ruled that encrypted digital evidence is admissible, provided it is obtained legally and decrypted under competent authority supervision. Cloud-based records are also covered under Sections 65A and 65B of the Evidence Act.
Principle Established:
Encrypted communications can be admitted if proper decryption and authentication are demonstrated.
Digital evidence from cloud platforms is recognized in terror financing cases.
5. National Investigation Agency v. Zia-ur-Rehman, (2020) SCC OnLine Del 521
Court: Delhi High Court
Issue: Cryptocurrency transactions as evidence in terrorism funding
Facts:
The accused used cryptocurrency to fund terrorist activities. NIA traced digital wallets and blockchain transactions to link funds to terror networks.
Judgment:
The court accepted blockchain transaction logs and cryptocurrency wallet records as admissible digital evidence, provided proper expert verification and authentication under IT Act 2000.
Principle Established:
Cryptocurrency and blockchain records can serve as evidence in terrorism prosecutions.
Expert verification is crucial for technical digital evidence.
Key Takeaways:
Digital evidence is legally recognized under Sections 65A and 65B of the Indian Evidence Act.
Proper authentication, chain of custody, and lawful acquisition are mandatory.
Evidence from emails, chats, social media, mobile phones, cloud platforms, and blockchain is admissible.
Courts consistently uphold digital evidence in terrorism prosecutions to establish conspiracy, financing, and coordination.
Lawful interception under IT and telecommunication laws strengthens admissibility.
RELATED Blog
0 comments