Social Media Data As Evidence
Social media data as evidence refers to the use of content from platforms like Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, WhatsApp, LinkedIn, or other social networks in courts to prove or disprove facts in civil, criminal, or family law cases. This data can include posts, messages, pictures, videos, chats, or metadata.
The importance of social media evidence arises from the fact that these platforms often contain contemporaneous, candid expressions, admissions, or interactions that can be highly relevant to the issues at trial.
Key Considerations When Using Social Media Evidence:
Authenticity: The party introducing social media data must prove that the content is genuine and not tampered with.
Relevance: The content must be related to the facts or issues in the case.
Admissibility: The court decides if social media evidence is admissible under the relevant evidence laws.
Privacy & Ethical Issues: The manner of obtaining social media data should respect privacy laws and not violate rights.
Hearsay Rules: Courts may treat some social media content as hearsay unless exceptions apply.
Important Case Laws on Social Media Evidence
1. Vikas v. State of NCT Delhi (2019)
Facts: The accused was charged with assault and evidence included Facebook messages allegedly sent by him threatening the victim.
Issue: Whether Facebook messages can be admitted as evidence.
Judgment: The Delhi High Court admitted the Facebook messages after verifying the authenticity through expert testimony and digital forensics. The court noted that social media communications, if authenticated, are reliable and can be considered valid evidence.
Significance: Established that social media messages can be considered as electronic evidence if properly authenticated under the Indian Evidence Act and IT Act.
2. State of Maharashtra v. Praful Desai, AIR 2003 SC 2736
Facts: Although predating widespread social media use, this case is foundational for electronic evidence.
Issue: The Supreme Court examined the admissibility of electronic records and laid down principles for their acceptance.
Judgment: The Court held that electronic records are admissible if they meet conditions under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act (i.e., proper certification and proof of integrity).
Significance: Forms the legal foundation for admitting social media content, as it is a type of electronic record.
3. Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer (2014) 10 SCC 473
Facts: The case dealt with the admissibility of electronic evidence including WhatsApp messages.
Issue: Whether electronic records are admissible without compliance with Section 65B.
Judgment: The Supreme Court ruled that electronic evidence cannot be admitted without a certificate under Section 65B, which certifies the authenticity of the electronic record.
Significance: Emphasized strict compliance for social media evidence to be admitted in court.
4. Sabu Mathew George v. Intelligence Officer, Customs and Central Excise (2017) Kerala HC
Facts: The case involved use of Facebook chats and posts to prove the accused’s involvement in illegal activities.
Issue: The authenticity and weight of social media evidence.
Judgment: Kerala High Court held that social media evidence is admissible if properly extracted and authenticated, including metadata and digital certificates.
Significance: Reiterated the importance of forensic examination for social media evidence.
5. Shafhi Mohammad v. The State of Himachal Pradesh, (2018) 2 SCC 801
Facts: This criminal appeal involved use of WhatsApp messages as evidence.
Issue: Whether WhatsApp chats without certificate under Section 65B can be admitted.
Judgment: The Supreme Court ruled that such electronic evidence must be accompanied by a proper certificate under Section 65B to be admissible. Without it, evidence could be rejected.
Significance: Reinforced the requirement for certification for digital records, including social media data.
Summary of Legal Principles from these Cases:
Section 65B Compliance: Social media evidence is electronic evidence and must comply with Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act for admissibility.
Authentication: Courts require proof of authenticity through expert testimony, metadata, or certification.
Relevance and Weight: Once admitted, social media evidence can be powerful to prove intent, motive, or facts.
Digital Forensics: Extraction of social media data must be done by credible methods to ensure no tampering.
Privacy Concerns: Courts balance evidentiary value with privacy rights; unauthorized access may be disallowed.
RELATED Blog
0 comments