Legal Validity of Electronic Evidence
The Digital Witness: Electronic Evidence in Indian Courts
“Don’t believe anything without good proof,” said William Kingdom Clifford, and that’s especially true in a courtroom. In India, like anywhere else, the law’s all about finding the truth through solid evidence. For over a century, the Indian Evidence Act of 1872 was our guide. But then came the digital age, and everything changed. Suddenly, we had emails, social media, and all sorts of digital stuff that could be used as evidence. The Information Technology Act of 2000 was a big moment, finally recognizing “electronic evidence.” But even with that, lawyers say we need to update our laws to keep up with all the new technology.
What Exactly Is Electronic Evidence?
You’d think there’d be a clear definition, but neither the old Evidence Act nor the newer IT Act spells it out. Basically, it’s any information stored on a computer that can be used in court. That’s everything from emails and social media posts to bank records and security camera footage.
Here’s a tricky part: a bank statement made by a computer is electronic evidence, but a police report typed on a computer isn’t, if it was typed by hand. The key is whether a computer program made the document.
The Tricky Thing About Digital Evidence
Digital evidence is complicated. It can disappear quickly, be easily changed, and is often encrypted or stored online. Think about it: the stuff in your computer’s RAM vanishes when you turn it off, and hard drives can be edited or wiped. Cloud storage, where data is scattered across servers, makes it even harder to track down and verify.
Why Digital Evidence Matters
It’s huge. In criminal cases, it can be the difference between guilty and innocent. In civil cases, it can help figure out who’s responsible. Remember the Panama Papers? They used a font analysis to prove forgery – that’s the power of digital evidence. Courts are also paying more attention. In a case called Tomaso Bruno, the court was suspicious when the police didn’t show CCTV footage.
How Do You Use Digital Evidence in Court?
The Evidence Act now says electronic records are documents. Sections 65A and 65B tell you how to get them admitted. You also have to prove where they came from and that they haven’t been messed with. And if you’re using part of an electronic record, you have to show the whole thing, so it’s not taken out of context.
Basically, our laws have to change with the times. We need solid rules for using digital evidence fairly.
The Digital Age in the Docket: Navigating the Complexities of Electronic Evidence
The old Evidence Act was written before computers were a thing. When we started using digital records, we needed new rules. That’s where Sections 65-A and 65-B came in. Unlike paper documents, you don’t bring the actual computer into court. You just need a certificate to prove the digital record is real. This is to stop people from changing the data.
The Supreme Court has had to clarify these rules. In Anvar P.V., they said you absolutely need that certificate. But in Shafhi Mohammad, they made an exception if you don’t have the device. More recently, in Arjun Panditrao Khotkar, they went back to saying the certificate is necessary.
The new Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha, 2023 (BNSS) allows for electronic trials and investigations, which is a big step.
The most important thing is that certificate under Section 65-B(4). It has to be signed by someone who knows the record is real and explains how it was made. This is to ensure that digital evidence is trustworthy. Our laws are trying to balance new technology with the need for fair trials. Digital data can be changed easily, so we need strong rules like Section 65-B.
One issue we still have is that we don’t always require the original computer. This is a challenge, but the certificate requirement is a good way to deal with the risks.
The Shifting Sands of Digital Proof: The Evolving Saga of Section 65B
Getting digital evidence into Indian courts has been a bit of a rollercoaster, especially with the rules about certificates under Section 65B.
At first, in Shafhi Mohammad, the Supreme Court said you might not always need a certificate, like if you don’t have the device. But then, in Arjun Panditrao Khotkar, they changed their minds and said you always need it.
This shows how serious the courts are about making sure digital evidence is real. Section 79A of the IT Act lets experts weigh in on digital evidence, just like Section 45A of the Evidence Act lets experts talk about other evidence.
Key Legal Provisions and Judicial Interpretations
The Evidence Act has a bunch of rules for digital evidence, like Sections 65A, 65B, and 67A.The courts have had to figure out how these rules apply. In Navjot Sandhu, they seemed to say you could use digital records as secondary evidence without the certificate. But that was overturned in Anvar P.V., which said you need the certificate. Then Shafhi Mohammad relaxed that, but Arjun Panditrao Khotkar put it back in place.
The Practicalities of Certification
When do you need to show the certificate? In M.R. Hiremath, the court said it’s okay if you don’t have it when you file charges, but you need it when you use the evidence in court.
Ideally, you’d have the certificate with the evidence, but it doesn’t always happen. If it’s missing, the judge in Arjun Panditrao Khotkar said they have to make sure you get it, as long as it doesn’t hurt the case.
Conclusion: A Call for Clarity and Consistency
The rules for digital evidence have gotten clearer. Arjun Panditrao Khotkar made it clear you need that certificate.
But technology is changing fast, so our laws need to keep up. We might need to change the Evidence Act again to make things clearer. We need to make sure the certificate rule is used consistently so that digital evidence is reliable and fair.
Disclaimer: (Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the KanoonKiBaat staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
Source Link
