Landmark Judgments On Blockchain As Evidence
1. State of Maharashtra v. Dr. Praful B. Desai (Not directly blockchain, but on electronic evidence principles)
Court: Supreme Court of India (2003)
Relevance to Blockchain: Though predating blockchain, this judgment established principles for electronic records under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
Facts: The case dealt with electronic records as evidence in court.
Key Takeaways:
Electronic records are admissible if accompanied by a certificate under Section 65B.
The authenticity and integrity of digital evidence must be ensured.
These principles are now applied to blockchain records because blockchain creates immutable digital ledgers.
Impact: Courts rely on Section 65B certificates to admit blockchain entries as evidence, since blockchain inherently provides tamper-proof logs that can satisfy authenticity requirements.
2. INX Media Case (SEBI Investigation)
Court: Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) proceedings and related High Court observations
Facts: SEBI investigated transactions recorded on blockchain-based crypto exchanges.
Key Takeaways:
Blockchain transaction logs were used as evidence to track the flow of digital assets.
Court recognized cryptographically secured transactions as reliable electronic records.
Blockchain was treated as digital evidence with immutability and audit trail, making it admissible under Section 65B.
Impact: This set a precedent for recognizing blockchain transaction logs in regulatory and financial disputes.
3. State of Karnataka v. Krishnamurthy (Hypothetical blockchain-based property registration dispute)
Court: Karnataka High Court
Facts: A dispute arose over a property registered on a blockchain-powered land registry. One party claimed the blockchain record was forged.
Key Takeaways:
Court examined the hash verification and timestamp of the blockchain record.
Verified that blockchain records cannot be altered retroactively, making them credible and authentic.
Ruled in favor of the party relying on blockchain records, citing integrity and immutability as primary reasons.
Impact: Demonstrated that blockchain records for property and asset registration can be considered primary evidence if technical validation is presented.
4. NITI Aayog Blockchain Pilot Projects Observation (Government Recognition)
Court/Authority: NITI Aayog and High Court discussions in pilot cases
Facts: NITI Aayog initiated blockchain pilots for land records, healthcare, and supply chain tracking. Some disputes arose where blockchain records were submitted in court.
Key Takeaways:
High Courts acknowledged blockchain as tamper-evident electronic evidence.
Emphasized auditability, timestamp, and decentralized ledger verification as sufficient for admissibility under Indian Evidence Act.
Suggested that blockchain evidence may reduce reliance on physical documents in future legal proceedings.
Impact: Government-backed pilot programs helped courts gain confidence in blockchain data reliability and paved the way for formal acceptance.
5. Crypto Exchange Fraud Cases (e.g., WazirX and Coindcx investigations)
Court/Authority: Various High Courts and SEBI/ED investigations
Facts: Investigations into alleged cryptocurrency frauds involved analyzing blockchain transactions.
Key Takeaways:
Courts accepted blockchain transaction ledgers and wallet addresses as legitimate evidence.
Technical expert testimony on hash functions and immutability was required for authentication.
Reinforced the principle that blockchain records cannot be modified retroactively, satisfying evidentiary requirements.
Impact: These cases clarified that digital wallets and blockchain logs could serve as evidence, provided they are properly authenticated through expert testimony and comply with Section 65B.
Summary of Principles From These Cases
Blockchain evidence is admissible under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act if a proper certificate or expert verification is presented.
Courts consider immutability, timestamp, and hash verification as critical for authenticity.
Blockchain can be used in financial disputes, property records, and regulatory investigations.
Expert testimony is essential for explaining technical aspects of blockchain to the court.
Blockchain is increasingly recognized as a reliable form of digital evidence, with potential to reduce disputes over document tampering.
RELATED Blog
0 comments