Whatsapp Chats As Evidence
WhatsApp Chats as Evidence: Overview
WhatsApp chats, like any other electronic communication, can be admitted as evidence in court under the broader category of electronic evidence. To be considered valid, such evidence must satisfy criteria regarding authenticity, relevance, and integrity. Courts analyze if the chats are genuine, unaltered, and properly obtained.
Key Legal Principles Governing WhatsApp Chats as Evidence
Admissibility: Courts recognize WhatsApp messages as electronic evidence under laws like the Information Technology Act, 2000 (India), or under rules of evidence like the Federal Rules of Evidence (U.S.).
Authentication: The party producing the chats must prove they are genuine and belong to the parties concerned.
Integrity: Ensuring chats are not tampered with or edited.
Relevance: Chats must be directly related to the facts in dispute.
Detailed Case Laws Discussing WhatsApp Chats as Evidence
1. Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer and Ors. (2014) – Supreme Court of India
Facts: The court discussed electronic evidence under the Information Technology Act, 2000.
Issue: Whether electronic evidence, including digital messages, can be admitted without the original device.
Holding: The court ruled that electronic evidence must be proved according to the provisions of Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act (IT Act), which requires a certificate confirming the authenticity of electronic records.
Relevance to WhatsApp: WhatsApp chats, being electronic records, need certification and proof of genuineness to be admissible.
Takeaway: Without proper certification (under Section 65B), WhatsApp chats alone cannot be admitted as evidence.
2. State of Maharashtra v. Dr. Praful B. Desai (2003) – Supreme Court of India
Facts: The case focused on the admissibility of electronic evidence (like emails and computer records).
Issue: How to authenticate electronic evidence.
Holding: The court emphasized that electronic evidence should be treated like documentary evidence, but with additional scrutiny on authenticity.
Relevance: WhatsApp chats fall under this framework — authenticity must be established through metadata, device ownership, and contextual evidence.
3. Shafhi Mohammad v. State of Himachal Pradesh (2018) – Supreme Court of India
Facts: WhatsApp chats were part of the evidence.
Issue: Authenticity and integrity of WhatsApp conversations.
Holding: The court accepted WhatsApp messages as evidence when properly certified and authenticated. The court also highlighted that digital evidence must be tested for genuineness and should not be admitted on mere assertion.
Takeaway: Proper chain of custody and certification are necessary for WhatsApp chats to be valid evidence.
4. P.R. Muthusamy v. Union of India (2018) – Madras High Court
Facts: The court admitted WhatsApp messages as evidence in a contractual dispute.
Issue: Whether WhatsApp chats showing acceptance of terms could constitute a binding agreement.
Holding: The court held that WhatsApp chats, when genuine and unaltered, could form the basis of a contract.
Relevance: WhatsApp chats are treated as electronic contracts and can bind parties if authenticity and consent are proved.
5. People v. Harris (California, USA, 2013)
Facts: The prosecution used WhatsApp chats extracted from a suspect’s phone.
Issue: Admissibility of WhatsApp conversations as evidence.
Holding: The court admitted WhatsApp messages after verifying chain of custody, proper extraction, and matching metadata.
Relevance: Demonstrates that even in the US, WhatsApp chats are admissible when properly authenticated and extracted following forensic protocols.
Summary of Best Practices for Using WhatsApp Chats as Evidence
Extract messages using forensic tools to preserve metadata.
Get certification under relevant electronic evidence laws (e.g., Section 65B in India).
Establish ownership of the device and account.
Ensure chain of custody to prove no tampering.
Corroborate messages with other evidence for context and reliability.
Conclusion
WhatsApp chats are increasingly accepted as reliable evidence, provided strict rules of authentication and integrity are followed. Courts require:
Proper certification (in India, Section 65B certificate),
Clear proof of ownership and authorship,
Preservation of original electronic format to avoid tampering,
And contextual relevance to the case.
This evolution reflects the growing role of digital communication in disputes and criminal proceedings.
RELATED Blog
0 comments