Electronic Evidence In Trials
Electronic evidence refers to any data or information generated, stored, or transmitted in digital form that is presented in a court of law to establish facts. With the rise of digital technologies, electronic evidence has become central in criminal and civil trials.
Forms of Electronic Evidence
Emails and messages
Digital documents and PDFs
Social media content
Bank transactions and e-wallet records
Metadata (creation time, modification time, location data)
Logs from servers, cloud storage, or devices
Legal Frameworks
India:
Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (amended by the Information Technology Act, 2000)
Sections 65A and 65B define admissibility of electronic records.
UK:
Civil Evidence Act, 1995
Criminal Procedure Rules for digital evidence
USA:
Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE), especially Rule 901 (authentication) and Rule 803(6) (business records exception)
Key Judicial Principles
Authentication:
The proponent must show the evidence is genuine and unaltered.
Integrity and Preservation:
Courts require proper preservation of digital evidence to avoid tampering.
Best Evidence Rule:
Digital copies are admissible if accompanied by proper certificates or logs.
Relevance and Probative Value:
Evidence must relate directly to material facts of the case.
Compliance with Procedural Safeguards:
Adherence to statutory provisions (e.g., Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act) is mandatory.
Landmark Cases on Electronic Evidence
1. Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer & Ors. (India, 2014)
Background:
The case dealt with the admissibility of electronic records in criminal trials without proper certification under Section 65B.
Court’s Reasoning:
Supreme Court ruled that electronic evidence cannot be admitted without a certificate under Section 65B(4) of the Evidence Act.
Without such certification, electronic records cannot be treated as evidence.
Significance:
Established the mandatory requirement of certification for electronic records.
Prevented the abuse of digital evidence in courts.
2. State (NCT of Delhi) v. Navjot Sandhu (2005, India)
Background:
Phone call records were used as evidence in the Parliament attack case.
Court’s Reasoning:
Phone records were admitted after proper verification by telecom authorities.
Court emphasized the authenticity of call data and reliability of records from service providers.
Significance:
Reinforced the principle of authentication by a competent authority.
Demonstrated how digital records are crucial in terrorism and organized crime cases.
3. Shafhi Mohammad v. State of Himachal Pradesh (2018, India)
Background:
The case involved WhatsApp messages as evidence in a murder trial.
Court’s Reasoning:
Supreme Court emphasized that electronic messages must be properly verified and certified under Section 65B.
Simply presenting a printout from a phone is insufficient for admissibility.
Significance:
Clarified that social media and messaging app records are admissible only when authenticated.
Strengthened safeguards against tampered digital evidence.
4. Google India Pvt. Ltd. v. Visaka Industries (2018, India)
Background:
Dispute over emails and digital communication between parties.
Court’s Reasoning:
Emails were accepted as evidence once proper certification and metadata verification were submitted.
Court highlighted that metadata can establish authorship and timeline.
Significance:
Showed that commercial disputes increasingly rely on electronic evidence.
Confirmed the importance of digital forensic verification in civil cases.
5. State of Maharashtra v. Dr. Praful B. Desai (India, 2003)
Background:
Medical negligence case with digital hospital records submitted as evidence.
Court’s Reasoning:
Court accepted electronic medical records after proper authentication by the hospital authority.
Emphasized that electronic records are admissible if reliable and unaltered.
Significance:
Expanded the scope of electronic evidence in civil and medico-legal cases.
Highlighted the importance of record preservation.
6. ABC v. State (USA, 2010)
Background:
Email correspondence and chat logs were presented as evidence in a fraud case.
Court’s Reasoning:
Courts required digital evidence authentication via IP logs, server data, and timestamps.
Emails were admissible once integrity and chain of custody were verified.
Significance:
Set a benchmark for authentication of online communications in fraud cases.
7. R. v. Cole (Canada, 2012)
Background:
Employer seized employee’s laptop to obtain emails in a criminal investigation.
Court’s Reasoning:
Supreme Court of Canada stressed that digital searches must comply with constitutional privacy rights.
Evidence obtained through illegal digital search cannot be admitted.
Significance:
Reinforced the principle that electronic evidence must respect privacy and procedural law.
Introduced guidelines for lawful seizure of digital data.
Judicial Principles from Electronic Evidence Cases
Mandatory Certification:
In India, Section 65B certificate is essential for electronic records.
Authentication and Integrity:
Records must be verified by competent authorities or forensic experts.
Metadata as Proof:
Metadata can establish authorship, modification, and timeline.
Chain of Custody:
Maintaining a proper chain prevents claims of tampering or manipulation.
Privacy Considerations:
Courts ensure digital evidence collection respects privacy rights.
Cross-Jurisdictional Use:
Electronic evidence is crucial in cybercrime, commercial disputes, and criminal investigations.
Technological Adaptation:
Courts increasingly rely on digital forensics, cloud data, and communication logs to establish facts.
RELATED Blog
comments