Ruling on the nature and manner of admission of electronic records in a court of law in Anvar PV v PK Basheer & others, a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court recently held that an electronic record presented as secondary evidence cannot be admitted unless it satisfies the requirements under section 65B of Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Section 65B provides that secondary evidence pertaining to an electronic record is admissible only if accompanied by a certificate that identifies the electronic record and describes the manner in which it was produced.
[ihc-hide-content ihc_mb_type=”show” ihc_mb_who=”3″ ihc_mb_template=”2″ ]
The court said: “Electronic records being more susceptible to tampering, alteration, transposition, excision, etc., without such safeguards, the whole trial based on proof of electronic records can lead to travesty of justice.”
The decision on admissibility of secondary evidence pertaining to electronic records overruled an earlier decision by a two-judge bench of the court in State (NCT of Delhi) v Navjot Sandhu alias Afsal Guru. As a result, electronic records such as compact discs and video compact discs used as secondary evidence must be accompanied by a certificate obtained when the electronic record is made. The person signing the certificate need only state that it is true to the best of their knowledge and belief.
The court held that this is necessary “to ensure the source and authenticity, which are the two hallmarks pertaining to electronic record sought to be used as evidence”. However, the court clarified that electronic records are admissible as primary evidence without compliance with the conditions in section 65B.
[/ihc-hide-content]
The dispute digest is compiled by Bhasin & Co, Advocates, a corporate law firm based in New Delhi. The authors can be contacted at lbhasin@bhasinco.in or lbhasin@gmail.com. Readers should not act on the basis of this information without seeking professional legal advice.
