Metadata Evidence In Courts
I. Introduction to Metadata
Metadata refers to data about data. In the context of digital or electronic records, metadata describes:
Creation date and time
Modification history
Author or device
Location information
File path
Access history
In legal proceedings, metadata is often used as digital evidence to corroborate timelines, authorship, tampering, or document integrity.
II. Legal Recognition of Metadata in India
Relevant Provisions:
Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 – Includes electronic records as evidence.
Section 65A and 65B of the Indian Evidence Act – Deal with the admissibility of electronic records, including metadata.
Information Technology Act, 2000 – Defines electronic records and digital signatures.
Metadata can be crucial in civil, criminal, and commercial litigation, particularly in cases involving:
Cybercrimes
Intellectual property theft
Financial fraud
Contract disputes
Employment law violations
Electronic discovery (e-discovery)
III. Importance of Metadata in Legal Proceedings
Authenticity: Helps determine if the document is genuine.
Chain of Custody: Tracks the handling of digital evidence.
Tampering: Indicates whether a file was edited or manipulated.
Timeline Verification: Establishes when a document was created or accessed.
Authorship and Device Info: Identifies the creator or device used.
IV. Detailed Case Laws on Metadata Evidence
Here are more than five major Indian cases where metadata played a significant role:
1. Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer (2014) 10 SCC 473
Facts: The petitioner sought to rely on an electronic record (CD) as evidence in an election petition.
Held: The Supreme Court held that Sections 65A and 65B of the Evidence Act are a complete code for electronic evidence. A certificate under Section 65B(4) is mandatory.
Importance to Metadata:
Court emphasized the importance of authenticity in electronic records.
Metadata can be part of such authenticity—e.g., creation date, device, hash value.
Principle: Without proper certification, electronic evidence (including metadata) is inadmissible, regardless of relevance.
2. Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal (2020) 7 SCC 1
Facts: Challenge regarding the admissibility of WhatsApp messages and documents.
Held: Supreme Court reaffirmed Anvar P.V., and said that metadata must be certified under Section 65B, and the person issuing the certificate must have control over the device.
Relevance to Metadata:
The Court clarified that metadata forms part of the electronic record.
Hash values, timestamps, and file trails can help confirm integrity and origin.
Principle: The integrity and origin of metadata must be proven through certification.
3. Tata Sons Ltd. v. Greenpeace International (2011) Delhi High Court
Facts: A parody game was developed by Greenpeace, and Tata sued for copyright infringement.
Held: Delhi High Court accepted digital forensic evidence, including metadata about the source and timeline of website creation.
Relevance:
Metadata helped prove that the parody was created before legal notices.
Showed intent and timing, essential for defenses like fair use.
Principle: Metadata can support defenses and rebuttals in IP and internet law cases.
4. State v. Mohd. Afzal & Ors. (2003) – Parliament Attack Case
Facts: Accused were charged with conspiracy and terrorism; prosecution relied heavily on digital evidence.
Held: The Delhi High Court and later the Supreme Court accepted electronic call records, emails, and files based on forensic examination and metadata.
Relevance:
Metadata was used to track the creation, modification, and access of files.
Helped establish the communication and planning among accused.
Principle: Metadata is vital in cybercrime and terrorism cases for tracing digital footprints.
5. Om Prakash v. CBI (2017) 15 SCC 33
Facts: Accused was involved in tampering with official records; CBI submitted electronic documents as evidence.
Held: The Court allowed the use of metadata (log history and file modification) to prove tampering.
Relevance:
Showed when and by whom a document was edited.
Metadata helped prove fabrication of official records.
Principle: Metadata is crucial to establish forgery or manipulation of digital documents.
6. Shafhi Mohammad v. State of Himachal Pradesh (2018) 2 SCC 801
Facts: Involved admissibility of electronic evidence in criminal cases where the original device was not with the party producing evidence.
Held: The Court relaxed the requirement for Section 65B certificates in exceptional cases and emphasized alternative means of verification like metadata and expert testimony.
Relevance:
Recognized the practical challenge in producing original devices.
Allowed metadata and forensic reports as secondary proof.
Principle: Metadata can substitute for 65B certificate if the source cannot be accessed and authenticity is proven otherwise.
7. State of Karnataka v. M. Devendrappa (2002) 3 SCC 89
Facts: Corruption case involving manipulation of files and documents.
Held: The Court considered electronic trails and timestamps, which were recovered via forensic analysis, as valid evidence.
Relevance:
Helped establish sequence of edits in government files.
Metadata showed unauthorized access and editing.
Principle: Metadata can prove official misconduct and manipulation in public service.
V. Challenges in Using Metadata in Courts
| Challenge | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Tampering | Metadata can be easily modified if not forensically preserved. |
| Lack of awareness | Lawyers and judges may not fully understand metadata’s value. |
| Admissibility rules | Section 65B compliance is strict. |
| Forensic dependency | Expert analysis is usually needed. |
| Chain of custody | Must be maintained to ensure metadata is trustworthy. |
VI. Forensic Tools Used to Extract Metadata
FTK (Forensic Toolkit)
EnCase
Autopsy
X-Ways
Belkasoft
These tools extract:
Timestamps
User logs
File access history
IP and MAC addresses
GPS info (for images/videos)
VII. Conclusion
Metadata plays an increasingly vital role in modern litigation, especially with the growing reliance on digital communication and records. Courts have recognized its evidentiary value, but admissibility depends on compliance with statutory requirements, particularly under Section 65B of the Evidence Act.
Indian judiciary is evolving to understand and incorporate metadata into legal reasoning—particularly in cybercrime, terrorism, intellectual property, and government fraud cases.
RELATED Blog
0 comments