{"id":2850,"date":"2023-11-25T14:02:00","date_gmt":"2023-11-25T08:32:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/?p=2850"},"modified":"2026-10-25T21:18:14","modified_gmt":"2026-10-25T15:48:14","slug":"the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/","title":{"rendered":"Electronic Records and Evidence in India: Legal Recognition, Section 61 BSA, Section 63 BSA (formerly Section 65B), the Certificate and Landmark Supreme Court Cases"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Emails, messages, call records, CCTV footage, files on a phone or a server: all of these can be evidence in an Indian court. Since 1 July 2024 the law that governs them is the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA), which replaced the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Section 61 of the BSA says that an electronic or digital record cannot be kept out of evidence merely because it is electronic and that, subject to Section 63, it has &#8220;the same legal effect, validity and enforceability as other document&#8221;. Section 63, which takes the place of the well-known Section 65B of the Evidence Act, lays down when a printout, copy or other computer output is admissible and requires a certificate in the form set out in the Schedule to the Act, in two parts: one filled in by the party and one by an expert.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This guide explains these rules in the words of the BSA, the Information Technology Act, 2000 and the Supreme Court&#8217;s judgments, from Anvar P.V. (2014) to Pooranmal (2026), with a Hindi summary and answers to common questions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"clf-keyfacts\" style=\"border:1px solid #d9d2c5;background:#faf7f2;border-radius:6px;padding:14px 18px;margin:0 0 24px\">\n<p style=\"margin:0 0 8px;font-weight:700\">Electronic evidence at a glance<\/p>\n<ul style=\"margin:0;padding-left:20px\">\n<li><strong>Same legal effect as other documents:<\/strong> Section 61 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, a new provision, gives an electronic or digital record &#8220;the same legal effect, validity and enforceability as other document&#8221;, subject to Section 63.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Legal recognition under the IT Act:<\/strong> Section 4 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 treats a legal requirement of writing as met by information in electronic form that is accessible for later reference; Section 5 does the same for electronic signatures.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Admissibility:<\/strong> Section 63 BSA (formerly Section 65B of the Evidence Act) makes a printout or copy of an electronic record admissible if four conditions about the device and the information are met and the certificate is filed.<\/li>\n<li><strong>The certificate:<\/strong> one certificate in the Schedule to the BSA, in two parts, Part A &#8220;To be filled by the Party&#8221; and Part B &#8220;To be filled by the Expert&#8221;, each giving the device details and the hash value; it must accompany the record each time it is submitted for admission.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Primary evidence:<\/strong> Explanations 4 to 7 to Section 57 BSA make certain electronic records primary evidence, and no certificate is needed where the original device itself is produced (Arjun Panditrao, 2020).<\/li>\n<li><strong>Landmark judgments:<\/strong> Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer (18 September 2014) made the certificate compulsory for electronic records used as secondary evidence; Arjun Panditrao Khotkar (14 July 2020) confirmed this and overruled Shafhi Mohammad (2018); Pooranmal (10 March 2026) held call detail records without the certificate inadmissible.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Old cases:<\/strong> an application, trial, inquiry, investigation, proceeding or appeal pending immediately before 1 July 2024 is dealt with under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (Section 170(2) BSA).<\/li>\n<li><strong>Producing records in a criminal case:<\/strong> a court summons, or a written order of the officer in charge of a police station, can require the production of any document or electronic communication, including communication devices (Section 94 BNSS, formerly Section 91 CrPC).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><em>Reviewed and updated by Century Law Firm, Delhi \u2013 October 2026. Statutory references are to the Acts as in force on that date. The Acts are quoted from their texts on India Code and the judgments from the Supreme Court&#8217;s own copies; Arjun Panditrao Khotkar (2020), whose own copy the firm could not open, is quoted from later Supreme Court judgments that reproduce it.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"clf-figure clf-ig\" style=\"margin:0 0 24px;padding:14px 12px;border:1px solid #e3e3e3;border-radius:6px;background:#fff\">\n<style>.entry-content .clf-ig,.entry-content .clf-ig *{box-sizing:border-box}.entry-content .clf-ig .ig-title{display:block;font-weight:700;color:#1f2d3d;font-size:1em;line-height:1.35;margin:0 0 4px;text-align:center}.entry-content .clf-ig .ig-sub{display:block;font-size:.82em;line-height:1.4;color:#555;margin:0 0 12px;text-align:center}.entry-content .clf-ig .ig-grid{display:grid;grid-template-columns:repeat(auto-fit,minmax(min(160px,100%),1fr));gap:10px;margin:0 0 10px}.entry-content .clf-ig .ig-grid2{display:grid;grid-template-columns:repeat(auto-fit,minmax(min(240px,100%),1fr));gap:10px;margin:0 0 10px}.entry-content .clf-ig .ig-grid3{display:grid;grid-template-columns:repeat(auto-fit,minmax(min(200px,100%),1fr));gap:10px;margin:0 0 10px}.entry-content .clf-ig .ig-box{background:#faf7f2;border:1.5px solid #b9a98c;border-radius:8px;padding:10px 12px;font-size:.88em;line-height:1.45;color:#222;overflow-wrap:anywhere;margin:0}.entry-content .clf-ig .ig-h{display:block;font-weight:700;color:#1f2d3d;margin:0 0 3px;font-size:1.02em}.entry-content .clf-ig .ig-s{display:block;color:#6b5f4b;font-size:.86em;margin:4px 0 0}.entry-content .clf-ig .ig-red{background:#fdeeee;border-color:#c98585}.entry-content .clf-ig .ig-green{background:#eef6ee;border-color:#86a986}.entry-content .clf-ig .ig-dark{background:#1f2d3d;border-color:#1f2d3d;color:#fff;text-align:center}.entry-content .clf-ig .ig-dark .ig-h{color:#fff;font-size:1.15em}.entry-content .clf-ig .ig-arrow{display:block;text-align:center;color:#8a7a5c;font-size:1.3em;line-height:1;margin:0 0 10px}.entry-content .clf-ig .ig-label{display:block;text-align:center;font-weight:700;color:#1f2d3d;font-size:.9em;margin:0 0 6px}.entry-content .clf-ig ul.ig-list{margin:0;padding:0 0 0 1.1em;list-style:disc}.entry-content .clf-ig ul.ig-list li{margin:0 0 4px;padding:0;font-size:inherit;line-height:1.45}.entry-content .clf-ig .ig-note{display:block;font-size:.8em;line-height:1.4;color:#555;margin:4px 0 0}.entry-content .clf-ig .ig-cap{margin:10px 0 0;font-size:13px;color:#555}<\/style>\n<span class=\"ig-title\">How an electronic record is proved in court<\/span>\n<span class=\"ig-sub\">Sections 57, 61 and 63 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, read with the Supreme Court&#8217;s rulings on the old Section 65B<\/span>\n<div class=\"ig-box ig-dark\" style=\"margin:0 0 10px\"><span class=\"ig-h\">Section 61<\/span>A record cannot be refused only because it is electronic or digital; it has the same legal effect as other documents, subject to Section 63<\/div>\n<span class=\"ig-arrow\">\u2193<\/span>\n<span class=\"ig-label\">Is the original itself before the court?<\/span>\n<div class=\"ig-grid2\">\n<div class=\"ig-box ig-green\"><span class=\"ig-h\">Yes: primary evidence<\/span>The device on which the information was first stored is produced, for example by its owner in the witness box. No certificate is needed (Arjun Panditrao, 2020). Section 57 Explanations 4 to 7 also make certain files and recordings primary evidence.<\/div>\n<div class=\"ig-box\"><span class=\"ig-h\">No: a copy (computer output)<\/span>A printout, CD, pen drive or other copy is admissible under Section 63(1) only if the conditions of Section 63 are satisfied.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<span class=\"ig-arrow\">\u2193<\/span>\n<div class=\"ig-grid3\">\n<div class=\"ig-box\"><span class=\"ig-h\">Section 63(2)<\/span>Four conditions: regular use of the device, information regularly fed in, device working properly, output derived from that information<\/div>\n<div class=\"ig-box\"><span class=\"ig-h\">Section 63(4)<\/span>A certificate with the record at each instance it is submitted for admission, signed by the person in charge and an expert<\/div>\n<div class=\"ig-box\"><span class=\"ig-h\">The Schedule<\/span>Part A filled by the party, Part B by the expert; both give the device details and the hash value, with the hash report enclosed<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<span class=\"ig-arrow\">\u2193<\/span>\n<div class=\"ig-box ig-red\"><span class=\"ig-h\">Admissible is not the same as proved true<\/span>The court then weighs genuineness and reliability, and may rely on the opinion of an Examiner of Electronic Evidence (Section 39(2) BSA and Section 79A of the IT Act).<\/div>\n<p class=\"ig-cap\" style=\"margin:10px 0 0;font-size:13px;color:#555\">Prepared by Century Law Firm from the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, the Information Technology Act, 2000 and the Supreme Court judgments discussed on this page.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Which section gives an electronic record the same legal effect as other documents?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Many readers search for this in the form of an exam question, often in Hindi: which section provides that an electronic or digital record shall have the same legal effect, validity and enforceability as other documents? The answer is Section 61 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, headed &#8220;Electronic or digital record&#8221;. It reads: &#8220;Nothing in this Adhiniyam shall apply to deny the admissibility of an electronic or digital record in the evidence on the ground that it is an electronic or digital record and such record shall, subject to section 63, have the same legal effect, validity and enforceability as other document.&#8221; In the Act&#8217;s official Hindi text the same section reads: &#8220;\u0907\u0938 \u0905\u0927\u093f\u0928\u093f\u092f\u092e \u0915\u0940 \u0915\u094b\u0908 \u092c\u093e\u0924 \u0907\u0938 \u0906\u0927\u093e\u0930 \u092a\u0930 \u0938\u093e\u0915\u094d\u0937\u094d\u092f \u092e\u0947\u0902 \u0915\u093f\u0938\u0940 \u0907\u0932\u0948\u0915\u094d\u091f\u094d\u0930\u093e\u0928\u093f\u0915 \u092f\u093e \u0921\u093f\u091c\u093f\u091f\u0932 \u0938\u093e\u0915\u094d\u0937\u094d\u092f \u0915\u0940 \u0917\u094d\u0930\u093e\u0939\u094d\u092f\u0924\u093e \u0938\u0947 \u0907\u0902\u0915\u093e\u0930 \u0928\u0939\u0940\u0902 \u0915\u0930\u0947\u0917\u0940 \u0915\u093f \u092f\u0939 \u0915\u094b\u0908 \u0907\u0932\u0948\u0915\u094d\u091f\u094d\u0930\u093e\u0928\u093f\u0915 \u092f\u093e \u0921\u093f\u091c\u093f\u091f\u0932 \u0905\u092d\u093f\u0932\u0947\u0916 \u0939\u0948 \u0914\u0930 \u0927\u093e\u0930\u093e 63 \u0915\u0947 \u0905\u0927\u0940\u0928 \u0930\u0939\u0924\u0947 \u0939\u0941\u090f \u0910\u0938\u0947 \u0905\u092d\u093f\u0932\u0947\u0916 \u0915\u093e \u0935\u0939\u0940 \u0935\u093f\u0927\u093f\u0915 \u092a\u094d\u0930\u092d\u093e\u0935, \u0935\u093f\u0927\u093f\u092e\u093e\u0928\u094d\u092f\u0924\u093e \u0914\u0930 \u092a\u094d\u0930\u0935\u0930\u094d\u0924\u0928\u0936\u0940\u0932\u0924\u093e \u0939\u094b\u0917\u0940, \u091c\u094b \u0915\u093f\u0938\u0940 \u0905\u0928\u094d\u092f \u0905\u092d\u093f\u0932\u0947\u0916 \u0915\u0940 \u0939\u094b\u0924\u0940 \u0939\u0948\u0964&#8221;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Section 61 is new: the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 had no corresponding section, and the firm&#8217;s Gazette-checked comparison of the two Acts marks it as a new provision. The Statement of Objects and Reasons printed with the Act says that the new law &#8220;provides for admissibility of an electronic or digital record as evidence having the same legal effect, validity and enforceability as any other document&#8221;. Two things follow from the wording. A court cannot refuse an electronic record only because it is electronic. But the equal status is &#8220;subject to section 63&#8221;: a copy (computer output) is admitted only if the conditions of that section are met, as explained below, while under the Supreme Court&#8217;s rulings on the old Section 65B no certificate is needed where the original itself is produced as primary evidence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Section 61 should not be confused with Section 4 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, headed &#8220;Legal recognition of electronic records&#8221; (in Hindi, &#8220;\u0907\u0932\u0948\u0915\u094d\u091f\u094d\u0930\u093e\u0928\u093f\u0915 \u0905\u092d\u093f\u0932\u0947\u0916\u094b\u0902 \u0915\u0940 \u0935\u093f\u0927\u093f\u092e\u093e\u0928\u094d\u092f\u0924\u093e&#8221;), which deals with laws that require information to be in writing. Section 62 of the BSA (formerly Section 65A of the Evidence Act) then adds: &#8220;The contents of electronic records may be proved in accordance with the provisions of section 63.&#8221;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">What is an electronic record? Meaning and types<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The BSA does not define &#8220;electronic record&#8221; itself. Under Section 2(2), words not defined in the BSA but defined in the Information Technology Act, 2000 (or in the BNSS or the BNS) &#8220;shall have the same meanings as assigned to them in the said Act and Sanhitas&#8221;. The definition therefore comes from Section 2(1)(t) of the IT Act: an electronic record means &#8220;data, record or data generated, image or sound stored, received or sent in an electronic form or micro film or computer generated micro fiche&#8221;. The IT Act also defines a &#8220;communication device&#8221;, a term Section 63 BSA uses, as &#8220;cell phones, personal digital assistance or combination of both or any other device used to communicate, send or transmit any text, video, audio or image&#8221; (Section 2(1)(ha)).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The BSA brings electronic records into its two basic definitions. A &#8220;document&#8221; under Section 2(1)(d) is any matter recorded upon any substance for the purpose of recording that matter, &#8220;and includes electronic and digital records&#8221;. &#8220;Evidence&#8221; under Section 2(1)(e) includes &#8220;statements given electronically&#8221; by witnesses, which are oral evidence, and &#8220;all documents including electronic or digital records produced for the inspection of the Court&#8221;, which are documentary evidence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">For the types of electronic records, the best guide is Illustration (vi) to Section 2(1)(d): &#8220;An electronic record on emails, server logs, documents on computers, laptop or smartphone, messages, websites, locational evidence and voice mail messages stored on digital devices are documents&#8221;. The certificate in the Schedule asks the person producing a record to tick its source from &#8220;Computer \/ Storage Media&#8221;, &#8220;DVR&#8221;, &#8220;Mobile&#8221;, &#8220;Flash Drive&#8221;, &#8220;CD\/DVD&#8221;, &#8220;Server&#8221;, &#8220;Cloud&#8221; and &#8220;Other&#8221;. The IT Act&#8217;s Section 79A Explanation defines &#8220;electronic form evidence&#8221; as &#8220;any information of probative value that is either stored or transmitted in electronic form and includes computer evidence, digital audio, digital video, cell phones, digital fax machines&#8221;.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Is there a difference between electronic and digital evidence?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Not in the statute. The BSA speaks of &#8220;electronic or digital&#8221; records in Sections 2(1)(e), 57, 61 and 81, and of &#8220;electronic and digital records&#8221; in Section 2(1)(d), while Sections 62 and 63 refer only to &#8220;electronic records&#8221;. It has no separate definition of &#8220;digital record&#8221;, and &#8220;electronic record&#8221; is defined only in the IT Act. Because Section 61 makes an electronic or digital record subject to Section 63, the same rules apply to both; the firm found no provision that treats them differently.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Legal recognition of electronic records under the IT Act, 2000<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Information Technology Act, 2000 (Act No. 21 of 2000) came into force on 17 October 2000 (notification G.S.R. 788(E) of that date). Its long title describes it as an Act &#8220;to provide legal recognition for transactions carried out by means of electronic data interchange and other means of electronic communication&#8221;. Section 4, headed &#8220;Legal recognition of electronic records&#8221;, is the provision most readers are looking for when they search for &#8220;legal recognition of electronic records&#8221;. It says: &#8220;Where any law provides that information or any other matter shall be in writing or in the typewritten or printed form, then, notwithstanding anything contained in such law, such requirement shall be deemed to have been satisfied if such information or matter is\u2013 (a) rendered or made available in an electronic form; and (b) accessible so as to be usable for a subsequent reference.&#8221;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Section 5 does the same for signatures: where a law requires information to be authenticated by a signature or a document to be signed, the requirement is met if it is authenticated by an electronic signature affixed in the manner prescribed by the Central Government. Under Section 2(1)(ta) an electronic signature &#8220;includes digital signature&#8221;.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This recognition has limits. Section 1(4) of the IT Act says: &#8220;Nothing in this Act shall apply to documents or transactions specified in the First Schedule&#8221;. The First Schedule lists, among others, &#8220;A will as defined in clause (h) of section 2 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (39 of 1925), including any other testamentary disposition by whatever name called&#8221; and &#8220;A trust as defined in section 3 of the Indian Trust Act, 1882&#8221;. It also lists negotiable instruments, other than &#8220;a cheque, a Demand Promissory Note or a Bill of Exchange issued in favour of or endorsed by an entity regulated by&#8221; the Reserve Bank of India and certain other financial regulators, and powers of attorney, except those that empower such an entity to act for the person executing them (both entries in their present form under notification S.O. 4720(E) of 26 September 2022). For the documents on this list, the IT Act&#8217;s recognition of electronic records and signatures does not apply.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The IT Act answers whether a document may exist in electronic form. The BSA answers how such a document is proved in court: Section 61 gives it equal status, and Section 63 sets the conditions for admitting it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">From the Evidence Act to the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam: old and new sections<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (Act No. 47 of 2023, dated 25 December 2023) came into force on 1 July 2024 under notification S.O. 849(E) of 23 February 2024. Its long title describes it as &#8220;An Act to consolidate and to provide for general rules and principles of evidence for fair trial.&#8221; Section 170(1) repealed the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, but Section 170(2) keeps the old Act alive for matters already pending: if, immediately before the BSA came into force, &#8220;there is any application, trial, inquiry, investigation, proceeding or appeal pending&#8221;, it &#8220;shall be dealt with under the provisions of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872), as in force immediately before such commencement, as if this Adhiniyam had not come into force.&#8221;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The table below gives the new section for each provision of the Evidence Act on electronic records, from the firm&#8217;s comparison data, which was checked row by row against the Gazette text. For any other section, use the firm&#8217;s <a href=\"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/legal-code-comparison-tool\/\">Evidence Act to BSA comparison tool<\/a>, and for what else the three new criminal laws changed, see the firm&#8217;s <a href=\"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/bharatiya-nyaya-sanhita-bharatiya-nagarik-suraksha-sanhita-and-bharatiya-sakshya-bills-an-analysis-of-the-reform-of-indian-justice-system\/\">explainer of the 2023 criminal law reform<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table><thead><tr><th>Subject<\/th><th>Indian Evidence Act, 1872<\/th><th>Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023<\/th><\/tr><\/thead><tbody><tr><td>&#8220;Document&#8221; includes electronic and digital records<\/td><td>Section 3<\/td><td>Section 2(1)(d)<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>&#8220;Evidence&#8221; includes statements given electronically and electronic or digital records<\/td><td>Section 3<\/td><td>Section 2(1)(e)<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Oral admissions as to contents of electronic records<\/td><td>Section 22A<\/td><td>Omitted; Section 20 deals with oral admissions as to the contents of documents, including electronic records<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Opinion of the Examiner of Electronic Evidence<\/td><td>Section 45A<\/td><td>Section 39(2)<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Opinion as to electronic signature<\/td><td>Section 47A<\/td><td>Section 41(2)<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Primary evidence<\/td><td>Section 62<\/td><td>Section 57 (four new Explanations)<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Secondary evidence<\/td><td>Section 63<\/td><td>Section 58 (three new clauses)<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Cases in which secondary evidence may be given<\/td><td>Section 65<\/td><td>Section 60<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Electronic or digital record: same legal effect as other documents<\/td><td>No equivalent (new)<\/td><td>Section 61<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Contents of electronic records proved under the admissibility section<\/td><td>Section 65A<\/td><td>Section 62<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Admissibility of electronic records and the certificate<\/td><td>Section 65B<\/td><td>Section 63 and the Schedule<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Proof of electronic signature<\/td><td>Section 67A<\/td><td>Section 66<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Verification of digital signature<\/td><td>Section 73A<\/td><td>Section 73<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Presumption as to Gazettes in electronic form<\/td><td>Section 81A<\/td><td>Section 81<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Presumption as to electronic agreements<\/td><td>Section 85A<\/td><td>Section 85<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Presumption as to electronic records and electronic signatures<\/td><td>Section 85B<\/td><td>Section 86<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Presumption as to Electronic Signature Certificates<\/td><td>Section 85C<\/td><td>Section 87<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Presumption as to electronic messages<\/td><td>Section 88A<\/td><td>Section 90<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Presumption as to electronic records five years old<\/td><td>Section 90A<\/td><td>Section 93<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Production of documents or electronic records another person could refuse to produce<\/td><td>Section 131<\/td><td>Section 136<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Production of documents by a witness summoned<\/td><td>Section 162<\/td><td>Section 165<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Using a document whose production was refused on notice<\/td><td>Section 164<\/td><td>Section 167<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Section 63 BSA explained: admissibility of electronic records (formerly Section 65B)<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Section 63 is the centre of the law on electronic evidence. It re-enacts, with changes, Section 65B of the Evidence Act, which the Supreme Court described in Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer (2014) as &#8220;a complete code in itself&#8221;.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Sub-section (1): when a computer output is treated as a document<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Under Section 63(1), any information contained in an electronic record &#8220;which is printed on paper, stored, recorded or copied in optical or magnetic media or semiconductor memory which is produced by a computer or any communication device or otherwise stored, recorded or copied in any electronic form (hereinafter referred to as the computer output) shall be deemed to be also a document, if the conditions mentioned in this section are satisfied&#8221;, and is admissible in any proceedings &#8220;without further proof or production of the original&#8221;. In simple terms, a printout, CD, pen drive or other copy counts as a document and can be admitted without the original device, but only if the conditions are met. The firm&#8217;s comparison notes that the words &#8220;or semiconductor memory&#8221; and &#8220;or any communication device or otherwise stored, recorded, or copied in any electronic form&#8221; are new, so communication devices such as phones, and records kept in any electronic form, are expressly covered.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Sub-section (2): the four conditions<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The conditions are, in short: (a) the output was produced while the computer or communication device was used regularly to create, store or process information for an activity regularly carried on by the person having lawful control over its use; (b) information of that kind was regularly fed into the device in the ordinary course of those activities; (c) the device was operating properly or, if not, the problem &#8220;was not such as to affect the electronic record or the accuracy of its contents&#8221;; and (d) the information in the record &#8220;reproduces or is derived from such information fed into the computer or Communication device in the ordinary course of the said activities&#8221;.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Sub-sections (3) and (5): several devices, and how information is supplied<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Where the work was done by several computers or communication devices, whether in standalone mode, on a computer system or network, on a computer resource, or &#8220;through an intermediary&#8221;, Section 63(3) treats them all &#8220;as constituting a single computer or communication device&#8221;. An &#8220;intermediary&#8221; under Section 2(1)(w) of the IT Act includes telecom, network and internet service providers, web-hosting service providers, search engines, online payment, auction and market places and cyber cafes. Section 63(5) adds that information counts as supplied to a device, and an output as produced by it, whether directly or &#8220;(with or without human intervention) by means of any appropriate equipment&#8221;.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Sub-section (4): the certificate<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Under Section 63(4), &#8220;a certificate doing any of the following things shall be submitted along with the electronic record at each instance where it is being submitted for admission&#8221;: identifying the record and &#8220;describing the manner in which it was produced&#8221;; giving particulars of any device involved; and dealing with the conditions in sub-section (2). It must be &#8220;signed by a person in charge of the computer or communication device or the management of the relevant activities (whichever is appropriate) and an expert&#8221;, and it is &#8220;evidence of any matter stated in the certificate&#8221;. It is enough for a matter to be stated &#8220;to the best of the knowledge and belief of the person stating it in the certificate specified in the Schedule&#8221;.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The firm&#8217;s comparison records four changes from Section 65B(4): the certificate must now go with the record &#8220;at each instance&#8221;; clause (b) now also refers to &#8220;a communication device referred to in clauses (a) to (e) of sub-section (3)&#8221;; the signatory is &#8220;a person in charge of the computer or communication device or the management of the relevant activities&#8221; instead of &#8220;a person occupying a responsible official position in relation to the operation of the relevant device or the management of the relevant activities&#8221;; and the words &#8220;and an expert&#8221; and &#8220;in the certificate specified in the schedule&#8221; were added, so an expert must also sign and the prescribed form must be used.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">The Section 63 certificate: Part A and Part B of the Schedule<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The certificate is printed in the Schedule to the BSA, marked &#8220;[See section 63(4)(c)]&#8221;. It is a single form headed &#8220;CERTIFICATE&#8221;, in two parts: &#8220;PART A (To be filled by the Party)&#8221; and &#8220;PART B (To be filled by the Expert)&#8221;. So, to the exam question on how many certificates the Schedule provides, the answer is one certificate, in two parts. In the Hindi text the parts are &#8220;\u092d\u093e\u0917 \u0915 (\u092a\u0915\u094d\u0937\u0915\u093e\u0930 \u0926\u094d\u0935\u093e\u0930\u093e \u092d\u0930\u093e \u091c\u093e\u0928\u093e \u0939\u0948)&#8221; and &#8220;\u092d\u093e\u0917 \u0916 (\u0935\u093f\u0936\u0947\u0937\u091c\u094d\u091e \u0926\u094d\u0935\u093e\u0930\u093e \u092d\u0930\u093e \u091c\u093e\u0928\u093e \u0939\u0948)&#8221;.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In Part A, the person producing the record gives his or her particulars and states on solemn affirmation from which source the record was taken (computer or storage media, DVR, mobile, flash drive, CD or DVD, server, cloud, or other), with the make and model, colour, serial number and &#8220;IMEI\/UIN\/UID\/MAC\/Cloud ID&#8221; of the device where applicable. Part A restates the conditions of Section 63(2): that the device was under lawful control for regular activities, that it &#8220;was working properly&#8221;, and that the information &#8220;was regularly fed into the computer during the ordinary course of business&#8221;. The party says whether the device is owned, maintained, managed or operated by him or her, gives &#8220;the HASH value\/s of the electronic\/digital record\/s&#8221; and the algorithm used (SHA1, SHA256, MD5 or another &#8220;Legally acceptable standard&#8221;), encloses the hash report, and signs with the date, time and place.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Part B is filled in by the expert, who identifies the same device or source, states the hash value and the algorithm used, encloses the hash report, and signs with name and designation. Part B does not repeat the statement about lawful control and proper working, which belongs to the party in Part A.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Act does not define a hash value. The Statement of Objects and Reasons printed with it, describing the wider scope of secondary evidence, says that &#8220;giving matching hash value of original record will be admissible as proof of evidence in the form of secondary evidence&#8221;; in the Act itself the hash value appears only in the certificate in the Schedule. The hash value stated in both parts, with the hash report, is what allows the record produced in court to be matched with the original. The firm did not find any Supreme Court judgment yet that interprets the two-part certificate; the case law is still the case law on Section 65B, described below.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Primary and secondary electronic evidence<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The BSA keeps the general rules on documents. &#8220;The contents of documents may be proved either by primary or by secondary evidence&#8221; (Section 56). &#8220;Primary evidence means the document itself produced for the inspection of the Court&#8221; (Section 57), and &#8220;Documents shall be proved by primary evidence except in the cases hereinafter mentioned&#8221; (Section 59). For electronic records the BSA adds four new Explanations to Section 57, which say when an electronic record is itself primary evidence:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">&#8220;Explanation 4.\u2014Where an electronic or digital record is created or stored, and such storage occurs simultaneously or sequentially in multiple files, each such file is primary evidence.&#8221; &#8220;Explanation 5.\u2014Where an electronic or digital record is produced from proper custody, such electronic and digital record is primary evidence unless it is disputed.&#8221; &#8220;Explanation 6.\u2014Where a video recording is simultaneously stored in electronic form and transmitted or broadcast or transferred to another, each of the stored recordings is primary evidence.&#8221; &#8220;Explanation 7.\u2014Where an electronic or digital record is stored in multiple storage spaces in a computer resource, each such automated storage, including temporary files, is primary evidence.&#8221;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Secondary evidence (Section 58, formerly Section 63 of the Evidence Act) includes certified copies, &#8220;copies made from the original by mechanical processes which in themselves ensure the accuracy of the copy&#8221;, copies made from or compared with the original, counterparts, and oral accounts of the contents of a document by a person who has seen it. The BSA added oral admissions, written admissions and the evidence of a skilled person who has examined numerous accounts or documents that cannot conveniently be examined in court.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Supreme Court drew the line between original and copy under the old law. In Anvar P.V. (2014) it held that &#8220;if an electronic record as such is used as primary evidence under Section 62 of the Evidence Act, the same is admissible in evidence, without compliance of the conditions in Section 65B of the Evidence Act.&#8221; In Arjun Panditrao Khotkar (2020), as quoted in later judgments of the Court (T. Naseer, 2023, and Ravinder Singh, 2022), it explained that Section 65B &#8220;differentiates between the original information contained in the &#8216;computer&#8217; itself and copies made therefrom \u2014 the former being primary evidence, and the latter being secondary evidence&#8221;, and that &#8220;the required certificate under Section 65B(4) is unnecessary if the original document itself is produced. This can be done by the owner of a laptop computer, computer tablet or even a mobile phone, by stepping into the witness box and proving that the concerned device, on which the original information is first stored, is owned and\/or operated by him.&#8221;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Presumptions, electronic signatures and expert opinion<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The BSA carries over the Evidence Act&#8217;s presumptions for electronic records, and their limits matter as much as their scope. Under Section 85 (formerly Section 85A), &#8220;The Court shall presume that every electronic record purporting to be an agreement containing the electronic or digital signature of the parties was so concluded by affixing the electronic or digital signature of the parties&#8221;; the presumption is about how the agreement was concluded, not about its validity. Section 86 (formerly Section 85B) presumes, unless the contrary is proved, that a &#8220;secure electronic record&#8221; has not been altered since the point of time to which its secure status relates, and that a &#8220;secure electronic signature&#8221; was affixed with the intention of signing or approving the record. It adds that &#8220;except in the case of a secure electronic record or a secure electronic signature, nothing in this section shall create any presumption, relating to authenticity and integrity of the electronic record or any electronic signature.&#8221;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Section 90 (formerly Section 88A) is often misunderstood. It says: &#8220;The Court may presume that an electronic message, forwarded by the originator through an electronic mail server to the addressee to whom the message purports to be addressed corresponds with the message as fed into his computer for transmission; but the Court shall not make any presumption as to the person by whom such message was sent.&#8221; The presumption therefore covers the content of an email as sent, not the identity of the sender, which must be proved. Sections 87, 93 and 81 (formerly Sections 85C, 90A and 81A) contain further presumptions about Electronic Signature Certificates, electronic records five years old and electronic Gazettes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Where no presumption applies, a signature must be proved. Section 66 says that, &#8220;Except in the case of a secure electronic signature&#8221;, the fact that an electronic signature is that of the subscriber &#8220;must be proved&#8221;. To check a digital signature, the Court may direct the production of the Digital Signature Certificate or its verification with the public key listed in it (Section 73), and &#8220;the opinion of the Certifying Authority which has issued the Electronic Signature Certificate is a relevant fact&#8221; (Section 41(2)).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Expert evidence has its own provision. Under Section 39(2) of the BSA (formerly Section 45A of the Evidence Act), when the court has to form an opinion on information &#8220;transmitted or stored in any computer resource or any other electronic or digital form, the opinion of the Examiner of Electronic Evidence referred to in section 79A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (21 of 2000), is a relevant fact&#8221;, and such an Examiner &#8220;shall be an expert&#8221;. In Anvar P.V. the Supreme Court explained the order in which these questions arise: &#8220;Genuineness, veracity or reliability of the evidence is seen by the court only after the stage of relevancy and admissibility&#8221;, and the genuineness of an electronic record is examined, with the help of the expert, &#8220;Only if the electronic record is duly produced in terms of Section 65B of the Evidence Act&#8221;.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The provisions opened for this guide contain no rule written specifically for manipulated audio or video, often called deepfakes; such questions are tested through the certificate, the hash value and expert opinion. The firm&#8217;s guide to <a href=\"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/deepfakes-and-indian-law-is-the-it-act-enough-in-the-age-of-ai\/\">deepfakes and Indian law<\/a> discusses that subject, and its guide to <a href=\"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-role-and-admissibility-of-forensic-evidence-in-the-indian-criminal-justice-system\/\">forensic evidence<\/a> covers expert evidence more generally.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Landmark Supreme Court judgments on electronic evidence<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">If you are asked in which case the Supreme Court clarified the admissibility of electronic records, the answer is Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer (2014), which Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal (2020) confirmed and clarified. These judgments were given under Section 65B of the Evidence Act. Section 63 of the BSA re-enacts that section with the changes described above, and the Supreme Court has continued to apply them, writing &#8220;[Section 63 of the BSA]&#8221; next to Section 65-B in its judgment of 10 March 2026.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table><thead><tr><th>Judgment<\/th><th>Date<\/th><th>What the Supreme Court decided<\/th><\/tr><\/thead><tbody><tr><td>State (NCT of Delhi) v. Navjot Sandhu, (2005) 11 SCC 600<\/td><td>2005<\/td><td>Printouts of call records, certified by an official of the service provider, admitted as secondary evidence under Sections 63 and 65 irrespective of Section 65B (overruled on this point in 2014)<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer<\/td><td>18 September 2014<\/td><td>Section 65B is a complete code; an electronic record used as secondary evidence needs the certificate; the original used as primary evidence does not<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Shafhi Mohammad v. State of Himachal Pradesh<\/td><td>30 January 2018<\/td><td>Certificate relaxed for a party not in possession of the device (overruled in 2020)<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal<\/td><td>14 July 2020<\/td><td>The certificate is a condition precedent and oral evidence cannot replace it; not needed if the original is produced; can be ordered at any stage before the trial hearing ends<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Ravinder Singh @ Kaku v. State of Punjab<\/td><td>4 May 2022<\/td><td>Electronic evidence had to comply with the certificate requirement to be admissible; oral evidence could not take its place<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>State of Karnataka v. T. Naseer<\/td><td>6 November 2023<\/td><td>The prosecution was allowed to produce the certificate at a late stage of the trial<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Pooranmal v. State of Rajasthan<\/td><td>10 March 2026<\/td><td>Call detail records without the Section 65-B certificate were inadmissible; the Court added &#8220;[Section 63 of the BSA]&#8221; as the new equivalent<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Navjot Sandhu (2005) and Anvar P.V. (2014)<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In State (NCT of Delhi) v. Navjot Sandhu, reported as (2005) 11 SCC 600, a two-judge bench admitted printouts of computerised call records, holding, as Anvar P.V. records, that &#8220;Irrespective of the compliance with the requirements of Section 65-B, which is a provision dealing with admissibility of electronic records, there is no bar to adducing secondary evidence under the other provisions of the Evidence Act, namely, Sections 63 and 65.&#8221; (The firm could not open the Court&#8217;s own copy of that judgment.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer (Civil Appeal No. 4226 of 2012), reported as (2014) 10 SCC 473, was decided by Chief Justice R.M. Lodha and Justices Kurian Joseph and Rohinton Fali Nariman in an election case from Kerala in which compact discs of songs, announcements and speeches had been produced. The Court held that Section 65B &#8220;is a complete code in itself. Being a special law, the general law under Sections 63 and 65 has to yield.&#8221; Overruling Navjot Sandhu on this point, it said: &#8220;An electronic record by way of secondary evidence shall not be admitted in evidence unless the requirements under Section 65B are satisfied. Thus, in the case of CD, VCD, chip, etc., the same shall be accompanied by the certificate in terms of Section 65B obtained at the time of taking the document, without which, the secondary evidence pertaining to that electronic record, is inadmissible.&#8221; The safeguards exist &#8220;to ensure the source and authenticity, which are the two hallmarks pertaining to electronic record sought to be used as evidence&#8221;, and &#8220;The Evidence Act does not contemplate or permit the proof of an electronic record by oral evidence if requirements under Section 65B of the Evidence Act are not complied with, as the law now stands in India.&#8221; The CDs, which had no certificate, were not admitted.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Shafhi Mohammad (2018) and Arjun Panditrao Khotkar (2020)<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In Shafhi Mohammad v. State of Himachal Pradesh (30 January 2018), two judges relaxed the rule for a party not in possession of the device: &#8220;Such party cannot be required to produce certificate under Section 65B(4) of the Evidence Act.&#8221; That view did not last. In Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal (14 July 2020), reported as (2020) 7 SCC 1, Justice R.F. Nariman, writing for himself and Justices S. Ravindra Bhat and V. Ramasubramanian, said (paragraph 61, as quoted in later Supreme Court judgments): &#8220;We may reiterate, therefore, that the certificate required under Section 65B(4) is a condition precedent to the admissibility of evidence by way of electronic record, as correctly held in Anvar P.V. (supra), and incorrectly &#8216;clarified&#8217; in Shafhi Mohammed (supra). Oral evidence in the place of such certificate cannot possibly suffice as Section 65B(4) is a mandatory requirement of the law.&#8221; Shafhi Mohammad and the judgment of 3 April 2018 in the same case &#8220;do not lay down the law correctly and are therefore overruled.&#8221;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Arjun Panditrao also clarified that no certificate is needed where the original is produced, for example by the owner of a laptop, tablet or mobile phone in the witness box, but that a record held on a computer system or network that cannot be brought to court can be proved only with the certificate. On timing, it said (paragraph 59, as quoted in State of Karnataka v. T. Naseer): &#8220;So long as the hearing in a trial is not yet over, the requisite certificate can be directed to be produced by the learned Judge at any stage, so that information contained in electronic record form can then be admitted and relied upon in evidence&#8221;; but in a criminal trial, permitting evidence at a later stage &#8220;should not result in serious or irreversible prejudice to the accused&#8221; (paragraph 56).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Ravinder Singh (2022), T. Naseer (2023) and Pooranmal (2026)<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In Ravinder Singh @ Kaku v. State of Punjab (4 May 2022) the Court said that the uncertainty between Anvar P.V. and Shafhi Mohammad &#8220;has now been conclusively settled by this court&#8221; in Arjun Panditrao. In State of Karnataka v. T. Naseer (6 November 2023, 2023 INSC 988) it allowed the prosecution to produce a certificate late in a trial, because the certificate &#8220;is not an evidence which has been created now. It is meeting the requirement of law to prove a report on record.&#8221; And in Pooranmal v. State of Rajasthan (10 March 2026, 2026 INSC 217) a bench of three judges held: &#8220;In the absence of the certificate, mandatorily required under Section 65-B of the Evidence Act [Section 63 of the BSA], the call detail records become inadmissible in evidence and cannot be relied upon to support the prosecution&#8217;s case.&#8221;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">How to produce electronic evidence in court<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The first question is whether you will produce the original or a copy. If the information is on a device you own or operate, such as your own mobile phone or laptop, the ruling in Arjun Panditrao (given under Section 65B) allows you to produce the device itself and prove it in the witness box, and no certificate is then needed. If the record is part of a system or network that cannot be brought to court, or you rely on a printout, CD, pen drive or other copy, it must be produced under Section 63 with the certificate: Part A filled by you, Part B by an expert, each with the hash value and the hash report, submitted &#8220;along with the electronic record at each instance where it is being submitted for admission&#8221;. Preserve the original device or storage as well: under Explanation 5 to Section 57 a record produced from proper custody is primary evidence only &#8220;unless it is disputed&#8221;, and the court may need an expert&#8217;s opinion under Section 39(2).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Often the record is held by someone else, such as a service provider, an employer or the other party. Readers who search for a &#8220;subpoena&#8221; in India are usually looking for the power to summon a person to produce a document or thing. In criminal matters this is Section 94 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (formerly Section 91 CrPC): where a Court or the officer in charge of a police station considers the production of &#8220;any document, electronic communication, including communication devices, which is likely to contain digital evidence or other thing&#8221; necessary or desirable, the Court may issue a summons, or the officer may make a written order &#8220;either in physical form or in electronic form&#8221;, requiring the person who has it to produce it. In court, &#8220;A witness summoned to produce a document shall, if it is in his possession or power, bring it to Court, notwithstanding any objection which there may be to its production or to its admissibility&#8221; (Section 165(1) BSA, formerly Section 162), and a party who refuses to produce a document after notice &#8220;cannot afterwards use the document as evidence without the consent of the other party or the order of the Court&#8221; (Section 167, formerly Section 164).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">If the certificate was not filed at the start, it may be produced later in suitable cases. That is the position under Section 65B; the Supreme Court has not yet ruled on it under the new wording of Section 63(4), which requires the certificate to go with the record &#8220;at each instance where it is being submitted for admission&#8221;. In Arjun Panditrao (paragraph 56, as quoted in T. Naseer) the Court said that applications for this purpose &#8220;under Sections 91 or 311 CrPC or Section 165 of the Evidence Act&#8221; call for &#8220;A balancing exercise in respect of the rights of parties&#8221;; those provisions are now Section 94 BNSS, Section 348 BNSS and Section 168 BSA. Section 348 BNSS allows any Court, &#8220;at any stage of any inquiry, trial or other proceeding under this Sanhita&#8221;, to summon or recall a witness.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The BNSS also builds electronic means into criminal procedure: summonses in electronic form (Section 63), information about a cognizable offence by electronic communication, signed within three days (Section 173(1)(ii); see the firm&#8217;s guide to <a href=\"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/understanding-the-process-of-making-a-police-complaint-in-india-a-guide-for-commoners\/\">filing a police complaint and FIR<\/a>), audio-video recording of searches and seizures (Section 105), and trials, inquiries and proceedings &#8220;in electronic mode, by use of electronic communication or use of audio-video electronic means&#8221; (Section 530). Where evidence may be abroad, a Criminal Court may issue a letter of request to a court or authority in that country &#8220;competent to deal with such request&#8221; (Section 112 BNSS, formerly Section 166A CrPC).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Privacy, interception and data protection<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Collecting electronic evidence often touches privacy. In Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India (24 August 2017), a bench of nine judges declared that &#8220;The right to privacy is protected as an intrinsic part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 and as a part of the freedoms guaranteed by Part III&#8221;. The firm&#8217;s guide to the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/right-to-privacy-in-india-exploring-article-21-and-the-landmark-puttaswamy-judgment\/\">right to privacy and the Puttaswamy judgment<\/a> explains that decision.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The IT Act protects computer systems and data. Section 43 provides for penalty and compensation where a person accesses a computer system &#8220;without permission of the owner or any other person who is in charge&#8221; of it, or does the other acts listed, and Section 66 punishes doing any such act &#8220;dishonestly or fraudulently&#8221; with imprisonment of up to three years, or a fine of up to five lakh rupees, or both. Section 43A makes a body corporate handling sensitive personal data liable to pay compensation if it &#8220;is negligent in implementing and maintaining reasonable security practices and procedures and thereby causes wrongful loss or wrongful gain to any person&#8221;. Sections 72 and 72A deal with disclosure of electronic records or personal information without consent, by persons who obtained access under the Act&#8217;s powers and under a lawful contract respectively; since 30 November 2023, under the Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act, 2023, they carry money penalties of up to five lakh and twenty-five lakh rupees. The firm&#8217;s guide to <a href=\"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/cyber-crimes-laws-lawyers-india\/\">cyber crimes in India<\/a> covers the offences in more detail.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Two Acts provide for interception. Under Section 69 of the IT Act, the Central or a State Government, or an officer it specially authorises, may, for reasons recorded in writing, direct an agency to &#8220;intercept, monitor or decrypt&#8221; any information &#8220;generated, transmitted, received or stored in any computer resource&#8221;; the grounds include the investigation of any offence, and the procedure and safeguards are those prescribed under Section 69(2). The subscriber, intermediary or person in charge of the computer resource must assist the agency when called upon, and failure to do so is punishable with imprisonment of up to seven years and fine (Section 69(3) and (4)). For messages carried by telecommunication services and networks, the Telecommunications Act, 2023 applies. Section 20(2), in force since 26 June 2024, allows the Central or a State Government or a specially authorised officer, on a public emergency or in the interest of public safety and on the grounds listed (among them the sovereignty and integrity of India, public order and preventing incitement to an offence), to order that messages be intercepted, &#8220;subject to such procedure and safeguards as may be prescribed, and for reasons to be recorded in writing&#8221;. Section 60(1) repeals the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, but the Act&#8217;s text on India Code (updated to 24 August 2026) does not list Section 60 among the provisions brought into force.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 is coming into force in stages under notification G.S.R. 843(E) of 13 November 2025. Section 12 (the right to correction and erasure of personal data) and Section 44(2), which will omit Section 43A of the IT Act, take effect eighteen months from 13 November 2025, so they were not yet in force in October 2026, and Section 43A continues to apply until then.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">\u0907\u0932\u0947\u0915\u094d\u091f\u094d\u0930\u0949\u0928\u093f\u0915 \u0938\u093e\u0915\u094d\u0937\u094d\u092f (Electronic Evidence) \u2013 \u0939\u093f\u0902\u0926\u0940 \u092e\u0947\u0902<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>\u0907\u0932\u0947\u0915\u094d\u091f\u094d\u0930\u0949\u0928\u093f\u0915 \u0938\u093e\u0915\u094d\u0937\u094d\u092f \u0915\u094d\u092f\u093e \u0939\u0948?<\/strong> \u092d\u093e\u0930\u0924 \u092e\u0947\u0902 1 \u091c\u0941\u0932\u093e\u0908 2024 \u0938\u0947 \u0938\u093e\u0915\u094d\u0937\u094d\u092f \u0915\u093e \u0915\u093e\u0928\u0942\u0928 \u092d\u093e\u0930\u0924\u0940\u092f \u0938\u093e\u0915\u094d\u0937\u094d\u092f \u0905\u0927\u093f\u0928\u093f\u092f\u092e, 2023 (BSA) \u0939\u0948, \u091c\u093f\u0938\u0928\u0947 \u092d\u093e\u0930\u0924\u0940\u092f \u0938\u093e\u0915\u094d\u0937\u094d\u092f \u0905\u0927\u093f\u0928\u093f\u092f\u092e, 1872 \u0915\u093e \u0938\u094d\u0925\u093e\u0928 \u0932\u093f\u092f\u093e \u0939\u0948\u0964 \u092f\u0939 \u0905\u0927\u093f\u0928\u093f\u092f\u092e \u0907\u0932\u0947\u0915\u094d\u091f\u094d\u0930\u0949\u0928\u093f\u0915 \u0938\u093e\u0915\u094d\u0937\u094d\u092f \u0915\u0940 \u0905\u0932\u0917 \u092a\u0930\u093f\u092d\u093e\u0937\u093e \u0928\u0939\u0940\u0902 \u0926\u0947\u0924\u093e, \u0932\u0947\u0915\u093f\u0928 \u0927\u093e\u0930\u093e 2(1)(\u0918) \u0915\u0947 \u0905\u0928\u0941\u0938\u093e\u0930 &#8220;\u0926\u0938\u094d\u0924\u093e\u0935\u0947\u091c&#8221; \u092e\u0947\u0902 \u0907\u0932\u0947\u0915\u094d\u091f\u094d\u0930\u0949\u0928\u093f\u0915 \u0914\u0930 \u0921\u093f\u091c\u093f\u091f\u0932 \u0905\u092d\u093f\u0932\u0947\u0916 \u0936\u093e\u092e\u093f\u0932 \u0939\u0948\u0902, \u0914\u0930 \u0927\u093e\u0930\u093e 2(1)(\u0919) \u0915\u0947 \u0905\u0928\u0941\u0938\u093e\u0930 &#8220;\u0938\u093e\u0915\u094d\u0937\u094d\u092f&#8221; \u092e\u0947\u0902 \u0907\u0932\u0947\u0915\u094d\u091f\u094d\u0930\u0949\u0928\u093f\u0915 \u0930\u0942\u092a \u0938\u0947 \u0926\u093f\u090f \u0917\u090f \u0915\u0925\u0928 \u0924\u0925\u093e \u0928\u094d\u092f\u093e\u092f\u093e\u0932\u092f \u0915\u0947 \u0928\u093f\u0930\u0940\u0915\u094d\u0937\u0923 \u0915\u0947 \u0932\u093f\u090f \u092a\u094d\u0930\u0938\u094d\u0924\u0941\u0924 \u0907\u0932\u0947\u0915\u094d\u091f\u094d\u0930\u0949\u0928\u093f\u0915 \u092f\u093e \u0921\u093f\u091c\u093f\u091f\u0932 \u0905\u092d\u093f\u0932\u0947\u0916 \u0936\u093e\u092e\u093f\u0932 \u0939\u0948\u0902\u0964 \u0926\u0943\u0937\u094d\u091f\u093e\u0902\u0924 (vi) \u0915\u0947 \u0905\u0928\u0941\u0938\u093e\u0930 &#8220;\u0908-\u092e\u0947\u0932, \u0938\u0930\u094d\u0935\u0930 \u0932\u0949\u0917, \u0907\u0932\u0948\u0915\u094d\u091f\u094d\u0930\u093e\u0928\u093f\u0915 \u0905\u092d\u093f\u0932\u0947\u0916, \u0915\u0902\u092a\u094d\u092f\u0942\u091f\u0930, \u0932\u0948\u092a\u091f\u0949\u092a \u092f\u093e \u0938\u094d\u092e\u093e\u0930\u094d\u091f \u092b\u094b\u0928 \u092e\u0947\u0902 \u0926\u0938\u094d\u0924\u093e\u0935\u0947\u091c, \u092e\u0948\u0938\u0947\u091c, \u0935\u0947\u092c\u0938\u093e\u0907\u091f, \u0938\u094d\u0925\u093e\u0928\u0940\u092f \u0938\u093e\u0915\u094d\u0937\u094d\u092f \u0914\u0930 \u0921\u093f\u091c\u093f\u091f\u0932 \u0921\u093f\u0935\u093e\u0907\u0938 \u092e\u0947\u0902 \u0938\u0902\u0917\u094d\u0930\u0939\u093f\u0924 \u0935\u0949\u092f\u0938 \u092e\u0947\u0932 \u092e\u0948\u0938\u0947\u091c \u0926\u0938\u094d\u0924\u093e\u0935\u0947\u091c \u0939\u0948\u0902&#8221;\u0964 \u0907\u0932\u0947\u0915\u094d\u091f\u094d\u0930\u0949\u0928\u093f\u0915 \u0905\u092d\u093f\u0932\u0947\u0916 (\u0907\u0932\u0947\u0915\u094d\u091f\u094d\u0930\u0949\u0928\u093f\u0915 \u0930\u093f\u0915\u0949\u0930\u094d\u0921) \u0915\u0940 \u092a\u0930\u093f\u092d\u093e\u0937\u093e \u0938\u0942\u091a\u0928\u093e \u092a\u094d\u0930\u094c\u0926\u094d\u092f\u094b\u0917\u093f\u0915\u0940 \u0905\u0927\u093f\u0928\u093f\u092f\u092e, 2000 \u0915\u0940 \u0927\u093e\u0930\u093e 2(1)(\u0928) (\u0905\u0902\u0917\u094d\u0930\u0947\u091c\u093c\u0940 \u092a\u093e\u0920 \u092e\u0947\u0902 2(1)(t)) \u092e\u0947\u0902 \u0939\u0948: &#8220;&#8216;\u0907\u0932\u0948\u0915\u094d\u091f\u094d\u0930\u093e\u0928\u093f\u0915 \u0905\u092d\u093f\u0932\u0947\u0916&#8217; \u0938\u0947 \u0915\u093f\u0938\u0940 \u0907\u0932\u0948\u0915\u094d\u091f\u094d\u0930\u093e\u0928\u093f\u0915 \u0930\u0942\u092a \u092f\u093e \u092e\u093e\u0907\u0915\u094d\u0930\u094b\u092b\u093f\u0932\u094d\u092e \u092f\u093e \u0915\u0902\u092a\u094d\u092f\u0942\u091f\u0930 \u0909\u0924\u094d\u092a\u093e\u0926\u093f\u0924 \u0938\u0942\u0915\u094d\u0937\u094d\u092e\u093f\u0915\u093e \u092e\u0947\u0902 \u0921\u093e\u091f\u093e, \u0905\u092d\u093f\u0932\u0947\u0916 \u092f\u093e \u0909\u0924\u094d\u092a\u093e\u0926\u093f\u0924 \u0921\u093e\u091f\u093e, \u092d\u0902\u0921\u093e\u0930\u093f\u0924, \u092a\u094d\u0930\u093e\u092a\u094d\u0924 \u092f\u093e \u092a\u094d\u0930\u0947\u0937\u093f\u0924 \u092a\u094d\u0930\u0924\u093f\u092c\u093f\u0902\u092c \u092f\u093e \u0927\u094d\u0935\u0928\u093f \u0905\u092d\u093f\u092a\u094d\u0930\u0947\u0924 \u0939\u0948&#8221;\u0964 BSA \u0915\u0940 \u0927\u093e\u0930\u093e 2(2) \u0915\u0947 \u0905\u0928\u0941\u0938\u093e\u0930 \u092f\u0939\u0940 \u0905\u0930\u094d\u0925 BSA \u092e\u0947\u0902 \u092d\u0940 \u0932\u093e\u0917\u0942 \u0939\u0948\u0964 \u0915\u093e\u0928\u0942\u0928 \u0907\u0932\u0947\u0915\u094d\u091f\u094d\u0930\u0949\u0928\u093f\u0915 \u0914\u0930 \u0921\u093f\u091c\u093f\u091f\u0932 \u0938\u093e\u0915\u094d\u0937\u094d\u092f \u092e\u0947\u0902 \u0915\u094b\u0908 \u092d\u0947\u0926 \u0928\u0939\u0940\u0902 \u0915\u0930\u0924\u093e\u0964<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>\u092a\u0930\u0940\u0915\u094d\u0937\u093e \u0915\u093e \u092a\u094d\u0930\u0936\u094d\u0928: \u0915\u094c\u0928 \u0938\u0940 \u0927\u093e\u0930\u093e \u0915\u0939\u0924\u0940 \u0939\u0948 \u0915\u093f \u0907\u0932\u0947\u0915\u094d\u091f\u094d\u0930\u0949\u0928\u093f\u0915 \u092f\u093e \u0921\u093f\u091c\u093f\u091f\u0932 \u0930\u093f\u0915\u0949\u0930\u094d\u0921 \u0915\u093e \u0935\u0939\u0940 \u0915\u093e\u0928\u0942\u0928\u0940 \u092a\u094d\u0930\u092d\u093e\u0935, \u0935\u0948\u0927\u0924\u093e \u0914\u0930 \u092a\u094d\u0930\u0935\u0930\u094d\u0924\u0928\u0940\u092f\u0924\u093e \u0939\u094b\u0917\u0940 \u091c\u094b \u0905\u0928\u094d\u092f \u0926\u0938\u094d\u0924\u093e\u0935\u0947\u091c\u094b\u0902 \u0915\u0940 \u0939\u094b\u0924\u0940 \u0939\u0948?<\/strong> \u0909\u0924\u094d\u0924\u0930 \u0939\u0948 \u092d\u093e\u0930\u0924\u0940\u092f \u0938\u093e\u0915\u094d\u0937\u094d\u092f \u0905\u0927\u093f\u0928\u093f\u092f\u092e, 2023 \u0915\u0940 \u0927\u093e\u0930\u093e 61, \u091c\u093f\u0938\u0915\u093e \u0906\u0927\u093f\u0915\u093e\u0930\u093f\u0915 \u0939\u093f\u0902\u0926\u0940 \u092a\u093e\u0920 \u0939\u0948: &#8220;\u0907\u0938 \u0905\u0927\u093f\u0928\u093f\u092f\u092e \u0915\u0940 \u0915\u094b\u0908 \u092c\u093e\u0924 \u0907\u0938 \u0906\u0927\u093e\u0930 \u092a\u0930 \u0938\u093e\u0915\u094d\u0937\u094d\u092f \u092e\u0947\u0902 \u0915\u093f\u0938\u0940 \u0907\u0932\u0948\u0915\u094d\u091f\u094d\u0930\u093e\u0928\u093f\u0915 \u092f\u093e \u0921\u093f\u091c\u093f\u091f\u0932 \u0938\u093e\u0915\u094d\u0937\u094d\u092f \u0915\u0940 \u0917\u094d\u0930\u093e\u0939\u094d\u092f\u0924\u093e \u0938\u0947 \u0907\u0902\u0915\u093e\u0930 \u0928\u0939\u0940\u0902 \u0915\u0930\u0947\u0917\u0940 \u0915\u093f \u092f\u0939 \u0915\u094b\u0908 \u0907\u0932\u0948\u0915\u094d\u091f\u094d\u0930\u093e\u0928\u093f\u0915 \u092f\u093e \u0921\u093f\u091c\u093f\u091f\u0932 \u0905\u092d\u093f\u0932\u0947\u0916 \u0939\u0948 \u0914\u0930 \u0927\u093e\u0930\u093e 63 \u0915\u0947 \u0905\u0927\u0940\u0928 \u0930\u0939\u0924\u0947 \u0939\u0941\u090f \u0910\u0938\u0947 \u0905\u092d\u093f\u0932\u0947\u0916 \u0915\u093e \u0935\u0939\u0940 \u0935\u093f\u0927\u093f\u0915 \u092a\u094d\u0930\u092d\u093e\u0935, \u0935\u093f\u0927\u093f\u092e\u093e\u0928\u094d\u092f\u0924\u093e \u0914\u0930 \u092a\u094d\u0930\u0935\u0930\u094d\u0924\u0928\u0936\u0940\u0932\u0924\u093e \u0939\u094b\u0917\u0940, \u091c\u094b \u0915\u093f\u0938\u0940 \u0905\u0928\u094d\u092f \u0905\u092d\u093f\u0932\u0947\u0916 \u0915\u0940 \u0939\u094b\u0924\u0940 \u0939\u0948\u0964&#8221; \u092f\u0939 \u090f\u0915 \u0928\u0908 \u0927\u093e\u0930\u093e \u0939\u0948\u0964 \u0907\u0938\u0947 IT Act \u0915\u0940 \u0927\u093e\u0930\u093e 4 (&#8220;\u0907\u0932\u0948\u0915\u094d\u091f\u094d\u0930\u093e\u0928\u093f\u0915 \u0905\u092d\u093f\u0932\u0947\u0916\u094b\u0902 \u0915\u0940 \u0935\u093f\u0927\u093f\u092e\u093e\u0928\u094d\u092f\u0924\u093e&#8221;) \u0938\u0947 \u0928 \u092e\u093f\u0932\u093e\u090f\u0901, \u091c\u094b \u0915\u0939\u0924\u0940 \u0939\u0948 \u0915\u093f \u091c\u0939\u093e\u0901 \u0915\u094b\u0908 \u0915\u093e\u0928\u0942\u0928 \u0932\u093f\u0916\u093f\u0924, \u091f\u0902\u0915\u093f\u0924 \u092f\u093e \u092e\u0941\u0926\u094d\u0930\u093f\u0924 \u0930\u0942\u092a \u0915\u0940 \u0905\u092a\u0947\u0915\u094d\u0937\u093e \u0915\u0930\u0924\u093e \u0939\u0948, \u0935\u0939\u093e\u0901 \u0907\u0932\u0947\u0915\u094d\u091f\u094d\u0930\u0949\u0928\u093f\u0915 \u0930\u0942\u092a \u092e\u0947\u0902 \u0909\u092a\u0932\u092c\u094d\u0927 \u0914\u0930 \u092c\u093e\u0926 \u092e\u0947\u0902 \u0909\u092a\u092f\u094b\u0917 \u092f\u094b\u0917\u094d\u092f \u0938\u0942\u091a\u0928\u093e \u0938\u0947 \u0935\u0939 \u0905\u092a\u0947\u0915\u094d\u0937\u093e \u092a\u0942\u0930\u0940 \u092e\u093e\u0928\u0940 \u091c\u093e\u090f\u0917\u0940\u0964<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>\u0915\u094b\u0930\u094d\u091f \u092e\u0947\u0902 \u0907\u0932\u0947\u0915\u094d\u091f\u094d\u0930\u0949\u0928\u093f\u0915 \u0938\u092c\u0942\u0924 \u092e\u093e\u0928\u094d\u092f \u0939\u0948 \u092f\u093e \u0928\u0939\u0940\u0902?<\/strong> \u0939\u093e\u0901\u0964 \u092a\u0930 \u092f\u0926\u093f \u092e\u0942\u0932 \u0921\u093f\u0935\u093e\u0907\u0938 \u0915\u0947 \u0938\u094d\u0925\u093e\u0928 \u092a\u0930 \u0909\u0938\u0915\u0940 \u092a\u094d\u0930\u0924\u093f (\u092a\u094d\u0930\u093f\u0902\u091f\u0906\u0909\u091f, \u0938\u0940\u0921\u0940, \u092a\u0947\u0928 \u0921\u094d\u0930\u093e\u0907\u0935 \u0906\u0926\u093f) \u092a\u094d\u0930\u0938\u094d\u0924\u0941\u0924 \u0915\u0940 \u091c\u093e\u090f, \u0924\u094b \u0909\u0938\u0947 \u0927\u093e\u0930\u093e 63 \u0915\u0947 \u0905\u0928\u0941\u0938\u093e\u0930 \u0938\u093e\u092c\u093f\u0924 \u0915\u0930\u0928\u093e \u0939\u094b\u0924\u093e \u0939\u0948\u0964 \u0927\u093e\u0930\u093e 62 \u0915\u0939\u0924\u0940 \u0939\u0948: &#8220;\u0907\u0932\u0948\u0915\u094d\u091f\u094d\u0930\u093e\u0928\u093f\u0915 \u0905\u092d\u093f\u0932\u0947\u0916 \u0915\u0940 \u0905\u0902\u0924\u0930\u094d\u0935\u0938\u094d\u0924\u0941 \u0927\u093e\u0930\u093e 63 \u0915\u0947 \u0909\u092a\u092c\u0902\u0927\u094b\u0902 \u0915\u0947 \u0905\u0928\u0941\u0938\u093e\u0930 \u0938\u093e\u092c\u093f\u0924 \u0915\u0940 \u091c\u093e \u0938\u0915\u0947\u0917\u0940\u0964&#8221; \u0927\u093e\u0930\u093e 63 (\u092a\u0939\u0932\u0947 \u0938\u093e\u0915\u094d\u0937\u094d\u092f \u0905\u0927\u093f\u0928\u093f\u092f\u092e \u0915\u0940 \u0927\u093e\u0930\u093e 65B) \u0915\u0947 \u0905\u0928\u0941\u0938\u093e\u0930 \u092a\u094d\u0930\u093f\u0902\u091f\u0906\u0909\u091f, \u0938\u0940\u0921\u0940, \u092a\u0947\u0928 \u0921\u094d\u0930\u093e\u0907\u0935 \u092f\u093e \u0905\u0928\u094d\u092f \u092a\u094d\u0930\u0924\u093f (\u0915\u0902\u092a\u094d\u092f\u0942\u091f\u0930 \u0906\u0909\u091f\u092a\u0941\u091f) \u0915\u094b \u0926\u0938\u094d\u0924\u093e\u0935\u0947\u091c \u092e\u093e\u0928\u093e \u091c\u093e\u0924\u093e \u0939\u0948 \u0914\u0930 \u0935\u0939 \u092e\u0942\u0932 \u0921\u093f\u0935\u093e\u0907\u0938 \u0915\u0947 \u092c\u093f\u0928\u093e \u0917\u094d\u0930\u093e\u0939\u094d\u092f \u0939\u094b\u0924\u0940 \u0939\u0948, \u092f\u0926\u093f \u091a\u093e\u0930 \u0936\u0930\u094d\u0924\u0947\u0902 \u092a\u0942\u0930\u0940 \u0939\u094b\u0902: \u0921\u093f\u0935\u093e\u0907\u0938 \u0915\u093e \u0928\u093f\u092f\u092e\u093f\u0924 \u0909\u092a\u092f\u094b\u0917 \u0909\u0938 \u092a\u0930 \u0935\u093f\u0927\u093f\u092a\u0942\u0930\u094d\u0923 \u0928\u093f\u092f\u0902\u0924\u094d\u0930\u0923 \u0930\u0916\u0928\u0947 \u0935\u093e\u0932\u0947 \u0935\u094d\u092f\u0915\u094d\u0924\u093f \u0915\u0940 \u0928\u093f\u092f\u092e\u093f\u0924 \u0917\u0924\u093f\u0935\u093f\u0927\u093f \u0915\u0947 \u0932\u093f\u090f \u0939\u0941\u0906 \u0939\u094b, \u0909\u0938\u092e\u0947\u0902 \u0909\u0938 \u092a\u094d\u0930\u0915\u093e\u0930 \u0915\u0940 \u0938\u0942\u091a\u0928\u093e \u0928\u093f\u092f\u092e\u093f\u0924 \u0930\u0942\u092a \u0938\u0947 \u0921\u093e\u0932\u0940 \u0917\u0908 \u0939\u094b, \u0921\u093f\u0935\u093e\u0907\u0938 \u0920\u0940\u0915 \u0938\u0947 \u0915\u093e\u092e \u0915\u0930 \u0930\u0939\u0940 \u0939\u094b (\u092f\u093e \u0916\u0930\u093e\u092c\u0940 \u0938\u0947 \u0905\u092d\u093f\u0932\u0947\u0916 \u0915\u0940 \u0936\u0941\u0926\u094d\u0927\u0924\u093e \u092a\u094d\u0930\u092d\u093e\u0935\u093f\u0924 \u0928 \u0939\u0941\u0908 \u0939\u094b), \u0914\u0930 \u0905\u092d\u093f\u0932\u0947\u0916 \u0909\u0938\u0940 \u0938\u0942\u091a\u0928\u093e \u0938\u0947 \u0909\u0924\u094d\u092a\u0928\u094d\u0928 \u0939\u0941\u0906 \u0939\u094b\u0964<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>\u0927\u093e\u0930\u093e 63 \u0915\u093e \u092a\u094d\u0930\u092e\u093e\u0923\u092a\u0924\u094d\u0930: \u092d\u093e\u0917 \u0915 \u0914\u0930 \u092d\u093e\u0917 \u0916\u0964<\/strong> \u092a\u094d\u0930\u092e\u093e\u0923\u092a\u0924\u094d\u0930 \u0939\u0930 \u092c\u093e\u0930 \u0905\u092d\u093f\u0932\u0947\u0916 \u0915\u0947 \u0938\u093e\u0925 \u092a\u094d\u0930\u0938\u094d\u0924\u0941\u0924 \u0915\u0930\u0928\u093e \u0939\u094b\u0924\u093e \u0939\u0948 \u091c\u092c \u0909\u0938\u0947 \u0938\u094d\u0935\u0940\u0915\u0943\u0924\u093f \u0915\u0947 \u0932\u093f\u090f \u092a\u0947\u0936 \u0915\u093f\u092f\u093e \u091c\u093e\u090f, \u0914\u0930 \u0909\u0938 \u092a\u0930 \u0915\u0902\u092a\u094d\u092f\u0942\u091f\u0930 \u092f\u093e \u0938\u0902\u0938\u0942\u091a\u0928\u093e \u0921\u093f\u0935\u093e\u0907\u0938, \u092f\u093e \u0938\u0941\u0938\u0902\u0917\u0924 \u0915\u094d\u0930\u093f\u092f\u093e\u0915\u0932\u093e\u092a \u0915\u0947 \u092a\u094d\u0930\u092c\u0902\u0927, \u0915\u0947 \u092d\u093e\u0930\u0938\u093e\u0927\u0915 \u0935\u094d\u092f\u0915\u094d\u0924\u093f \u0924\u0925\u093e \u090f\u0915 \u0935\u093f\u0936\u0947\u0937\u091c\u094d\u091e \u0915\u0947 \u0939\u0938\u094d\u0924\u093e\u0915\u094d\u0937\u0930 \u0939\u094b\u0924\u0947 \u0939\u0948\u0902\u0964 \u0905\u0928\u0941\u0938\u0942\u091a\u0940 \u092e\u0947\u0902 \u090f\u0915 \u0939\u0940 &#8220;\u092a\u094d\u0930\u092e\u093e\u0923\u092a\u0924\u094d\u0930&#8221; \u0939\u0948, \u0926\u094b \u092d\u093e\u0917\u094b\u0902 \u092e\u0947\u0902: &#8220;\u092d\u093e\u0917 \u0915 (\u092a\u0915\u094d\u0937\u0915\u093e\u0930 \u0926\u094d\u0935\u093e\u0930\u093e \u092d\u0930\u093e \u091c\u093e\u0928\u093e \u0939\u0948)&#8221; \u0914\u0930 &#8220;\u092d\u093e\u0917 \u0916 (\u0935\u093f\u0936\u0947\u0937\u091c\u094d\u091e \u0926\u094d\u0935\u093e\u0930\u093e \u092d\u0930\u093e \u091c\u093e\u0928\u093e \u0939\u0948)&#8221;\u0964 \u0907\u0938\u0932\u093f\u090f \u0905\u0928\u0941\u0938\u0942\u091a\u0940 \u092e\u0947\u0902 \u0915\u093f\u0924\u0928\u0947 \u092a\u094d\u0930\u092e\u093e\u0923\u092a\u0924\u094d\u0930 \u0939\u0948\u0902, \u0907\u0938 \u092a\u094d\u0930\u0936\u094d\u0928 \u0915\u093e \u0909\u0924\u094d\u0924\u0930 \u0939\u0948: \u090f\u0915 \u092a\u094d\u0930\u092e\u093e\u0923\u092a\u0924\u094d\u0930, \u0926\u094b \u092d\u093e\u0917\u094b\u0902 \u092e\u0947\u0902\u0964 \u0926\u094b\u0928\u094b\u0902 \u092d\u093e\u0917\u094b\u0902 \u092e\u0947\u0902 \u0921\u093f\u0935\u093e\u0907\u0938 \u0915\u093e \u0935\u093f\u0935\u0930\u0923 (\u092e\u0947\u0915, \u092e\u0949\u0921\u0932, \u0938\u0940\u0930\u093f\u092f\u0932 \u0928\u0902\u092c\u0930, IMEI\/UIN\/UID\/MAC\/Cloud ID) \u0914\u0930 \u0905\u092d\u093f\u0932\u0947\u0916 \u0915\u0940 \u0939\u0948\u0936 \u0935\u0948\u0932\u094d\u092f\u0942 (SHA1, SHA256, MD5 \u092f\u093e \u0905\u0928\u094d\u092f \u0935\u093f\u0927\u093f\u0915 \u0930\u0942\u092a \u0938\u0947 \u0938\u094d\u0935\u0940\u0915\u093e\u0930\u094d\u092f \u092e\u093e\u0928\u0915) \u0932\u093f\u0916\u0940 \u091c\u093e\u0924\u0940 \u0939\u0948, \u0914\u0930 \u0939\u0948\u0936 \u0930\u093f\u092a\u094b\u0930\u094d\u091f \u0938\u093e\u0925 \u0932\u0917\u093e\u0928\u0940 \u0939\u094b\u0924\u0940 \u0939\u0948\u0964<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>\u092a\u094d\u0930\u093e\u0925\u092e\u093f\u0915 \u0938\u093e\u0915\u094d\u0937\u094d\u092f\u0964<\/strong> \u0927\u093e\u0930\u093e 57 \u0915\u0947 \u0928\u090f \u0938\u094d\u092a\u0937\u094d\u091f\u0940\u0915\u0930\u0923 4 \u0938\u0947 7 \u0915\u0947 \u0905\u0928\u0941\u0938\u093e\u0930 \u0915\u0908 \u092b\u093c\u093e\u0907\u0932\u094b\u0902 \u092e\u0947\u0902 \u0938\u0902\u0917\u094d\u0930\u0939\u093f\u0924 \u0905\u092d\u093f\u0932\u0947\u0916 \u0915\u0940 \u0939\u0930 \u092b\u093c\u093e\u0907\u0932, \u0909\u091a\u093f\u0924 \u0905\u092d\u093f\u0930\u0915\u094d\u0937\u093e \u0938\u0947 \u092a\u094d\u0930\u0938\u094d\u0924\u0941\u0924 \u0905\u092d\u093f\u0932\u0947\u0916 (\u091c\u092c \u0924\u0915 \u0909\u0938 \u092a\u0930 \u0935\u093f\u0935\u093e\u0926 \u0928 \u0939\u094b), \u090f\u0915 \u0938\u093e\u0925 \u0938\u0902\u0917\u094d\u0930\u0939\u093f\u0924 \u0914\u0930 \u092a\u094d\u0930\u0938\u093e\u0930\u093f\u0924 \u0935\u0940\u0921\u093f\u092f\u094b \u0915\u0940 \u0939\u0930 \u0930\u093f\u0915\u0949\u0930\u094d\u0921\u093f\u0902\u0917, \u0914\u0930 \u0905\u0938\u094d\u0925\u093e\u092f\u0940 \u092b\u093c\u093e\u0907\u0932\u094b\u0902 \u0938\u0939\u093f\u0924 \u0939\u0930 \u0938\u094d\u0935\u0924\u0903 \u0938\u0902\u0917\u094d\u0930\u0939\u0923 \u092a\u094d\u0930\u093e\u0925\u092e\u093f\u0915 \u0938\u093e\u0915\u094d\u0937\u094d\u092f \u0939\u0948\u0964 \u0938\u0941\u092a\u094d\u0930\u0940\u092e \u0915\u094b\u0930\u094d\u091f \u0928\u0947 \u0905\u0930\u094d\u091c\u0941\u0928 \u092a\u0902\u0921\u093f\u0924\u0930\u093e\u0935 \u0916\u094b\u0924\u0915\u0930 (2020) \u092e\u0947\u0902 \u0915\u0939\u093e \u0915\u093f \u092f\u0926\u093f \u0932\u0948\u092a\u091f\u0949\u092a, \u091f\u0948\u092c\u0932\u0947\u091f \u092f\u093e \u092e\u094b\u092c\u093e\u0907\u0932 \u092b\u094b\u0928 \u0915\u093e \u092e\u093e\u0932\u093f\u0915 \u0938\u094d\u0935\u092f\u0902 \u0917\u0935\u093e\u0939 \u0915\u0947 \u0930\u0942\u092a \u092e\u0947\u0902 \u092e\u0942\u0932 \u0921\u093f\u0935\u093e\u0907\u0938 \u0938\u093e\u092c\u093f\u0924 \u0915\u0930\u0947, \u0924\u094b \u092a\u094d\u0930\u092e\u093e\u0923\u092a\u0924\u094d\u0930 \u0915\u0940 \u0906\u0935\u0936\u094d\u092f\u0915\u0924\u093e \u0928\u0939\u0940\u0902 \u0939\u0948\u0964<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>\u0910\u0924\u093f\u0939\u093e\u0938\u093f\u0915 \u0928\u093f\u0930\u094d\u0923\u092f\u0964<\/strong> \u0905\u0928\u0935\u0930 \u092a\u0940.\u0935\u0940. \u092c\u0928\u093e\u092e \u092a\u0940.\u0915\u0947. \u092c\u0936\u0940\u0930 (18 \u0938\u093f\u0924\u0902\u092c\u0930 2014, \u0924\u0940\u0928 \u0928\u094d\u092f\u093e\u092f\u093e\u0927\u0940\u0936) \u092e\u0947\u0902 \u0938\u0941\u092a\u094d\u0930\u0940\u092e \u0915\u094b\u0930\u094d\u091f \u0928\u0947 \u0915\u0939\u093e \u0915\u093f \u0927\u093e\u0930\u093e 65B \u0905\u092a\u0928\u0947 \u0906\u092a \u092e\u0947\u0902 \u092a\u0942\u0930\u094d\u0923 \u0938\u0902\u0939\u093f\u0924\u093e \u0939\u0948 \u0914\u0930 \u0926\u094d\u0935\u093f\u0924\u0940\u092f\u0915 \u0938\u093e\u0915\u094d\u0937\u094d\u092f \u0915\u0947 \u0930\u0942\u092a \u092e\u0947\u0902 \u0907\u0932\u0947\u0915\u094d\u091f\u094d\u0930\u0949\u0928\u093f\u0915 \u0905\u092d\u093f\u0932\u0947\u0916 \u092a\u094d\u0930\u092e\u093e\u0923\u092a\u0924\u094d\u0930 \u0915\u0947 \u092c\u093f\u0928\u093e \u0917\u094d\u0930\u093e\u0939\u094d\u092f \u0928\u0939\u0940\u0902 \u0939\u0948\u0964 \u0936\u092b\u0940 \u092e\u094b\u0939\u092e\u094d\u092e\u0926 (2018) \u092e\u0947\u0902 \u0926\u0940 \u0917\u0908 \u0922\u0940\u0932 \u0915\u094b \u0905\u0930\u094d\u091c\u0941\u0928 \u092a\u0902\u0921\u093f\u0924\u0930\u093e\u0935 \u0916\u094b\u0924\u0915\u0930 \u092c\u0928\u093e\u092e \u0915\u0948\u0932\u093e\u0936 \u0915\u0941\u0936\u0928\u0930\u093e\u0935 \u0917\u094b\u0930\u0902\u091f\u094d\u092f\u093e\u0932 (14 \u091c\u0941\u0932\u093e\u0908 2020) \u0928\u0947 \u0909\u0932\u091f \u0926\u093f\u092f\u093e (overrule \u0915\u093f\u092f\u093e) \u0914\u0930 \u0915\u0939\u093e \u0915\u093f \u092a\u094d\u0930\u092e\u093e\u0923\u092a\u0924\u094d\u0930 \u0917\u094d\u0930\u093e\u0939\u094d\u092f\u0924\u093e \u0915\u0940 \u092a\u0942\u0930\u094d\u0935 \u0936\u0930\u094d\u0924 \u0939\u0948 \u0914\u0930 \u092e\u094c\u0916\u093f\u0915 \u0938\u093e\u0915\u094d\u0937\u094d\u092f \u0909\u0938\u0915\u0940 \u091c\u0917\u0939 \u0928\u0939\u0940\u0902 \u0932\u0947 \u0938\u0915\u0924\u093e; \u092a\u0930 \u091c\u092c \u0924\u0915 \u0935\u093f\u091a\u093e\u0930\u0923 \u0915\u0940 \u0938\u0941\u0928\u0935\u093e\u0908 \u092a\u0942\u0930\u0940 \u0928 \u0939\u094b, \u0928\u094d\u092f\u093e\u092f\u093e\u0927\u0940\u0936 \u0915\u093f\u0938\u0940 \u092d\u0940 \u091a\u0930\u0923 \u092e\u0947\u0902 \u092a\u094d\u0930\u092e\u093e\u0923\u092a\u0924\u094d\u0930 \u092a\u094d\u0930\u0938\u094d\u0924\u0941\u0924 \u0915\u0930\u0928\u0947 \u0915\u093e \u0928\u093f\u0930\u094d\u0926\u0947\u0936 \u0926\u0947 \u0938\u0915\u0924\u093e \u0939\u0948, \u092c\u0936\u0930\u094d\u0924\u0947 \u0906\u092a\u0930\u093e\u0927\u093f\u0915 \u0935\u093f\u091a\u093e\u0930\u0923 \u092e\u0947\u0902 \u0905\u092d\u093f\u092f\u0941\u0915\u094d\u0924 \u0915\u0947 \u0938\u093e\u0925 \u0917\u0902\u092d\u0940\u0930 \u092f\u093e \u0905\u092a\u0942\u0930\u0923\u0940\u092f \u0905\u0928\u094d\u092f\u093e\u092f (prejudice) \u0928 \u0939\u094b\u0964 \u092f\u0947 \u0928\u093f\u0930\u094d\u0923\u092f \u0927\u093e\u0930\u093e 65B \u0915\u0947 \u0905\u0902\u0924\u0930\u094d\u0917\u0924 \u0926\u093f\u090f \u0917\u090f \u0925\u0947; \u0927\u093e\u0930\u093e 63(4) \u0915\u0947 \u0928\u090f \u0936\u092c\u094d\u0926\u094b\u0902 \u092a\u0930 \u0938\u0941\u092a\u094d\u0930\u0940\u092e \u0915\u094b\u0930\u094d\u091f \u0915\u093e \u0915\u094b\u0908 \u0928\u093f\u0930\u094d\u0923\u092f \u092b\u0930\u094d\u092e \u0915\u094b \u0905\u092d\u0940 \u0928\u0939\u0940\u0902 \u092e\u093f\u0932\u093e\u0964 \u092a\u0942\u0930\u0928\u092e\u0932 \u092c\u0928\u093e\u092e \u0930\u093e\u091c\u0938\u094d\u0925\u093e\u0928 \u0930\u093e\u091c\u094d\u092f (10 \u092e\u093e\u0930\u094d\u091a 2026) \u092e\u0947\u0902 \u092a\u094d\u0930\u092e\u093e\u0923\u092a\u0924\u094d\u0930 \u0915\u0947 \u0905\u092d\u093e\u0935 \u092e\u0947\u0902 \u0915\u0949\u0932 \u0921\u093f\u091f\u0947\u0932 \u0930\u093f\u0915\u0949\u0930\u094d\u0921 \u0905\u0917\u094d\u0930\u093e\u0939\u094d\u092f \u092e\u093e\u0928\u0947 \u0917\u090f\u0964<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>\u092a\u0941\u0930\u093e\u0928\u0947 \u092e\u093e\u092e\u0932\u0947 \u0914\u0930 \u0938\u093e\u0915\u094d\u0937\u094d\u092f \u092e\u0901\u0917\u0935\u093e\u0928\u093e\u0964<\/strong> \u0927\u093e\u0930\u093e 170(2) \u0915\u0947 \u0905\u0928\u0941\u0938\u093e\u0930 \u091c\u094b \u0906\u0935\u0947\u0926\u0928, \u0935\u093f\u091a\u093e\u0930\u0923, \u091c\u093e\u0902\u091a, \u0905\u0928\u094d\u0935\u0947\u0937\u0923, \u0915\u093e\u0930\u094d\u092f\u0935\u093e\u0939\u0940 \u092f\u093e \u0905\u092a\u0940\u0932 1 \u091c\u0941\u0932\u093e\u0908 2024 \u0938\u0947 \u0920\u0940\u0915 \u092a\u0939\u0932\u0947 \u0932\u0902\u092c\u093f\u0924 \u0925\u0940, \u0909\u0938\u0915\u093e \u0928\u093f\u092a\u091f\u093e\u0930\u093e \u092a\u0941\u0930\u093e\u0928\u0947 \u092d\u093e\u0930\u0924\u0940\u092f \u0938\u093e\u0915\u094d\u0937\u094d\u092f \u0905\u0927\u093f\u0928\u093f\u092f\u092e, 1872 \u0915\u0947 \u0905\u0928\u0941\u0938\u093e\u0930 \u0939\u0940 \u0939\u094b\u0917\u093e\u0964 \u0906\u092a\u0930\u093e\u0927\u093f\u0915 \u092e\u093e\u092e\u0932\u094b\u0902 \u092e\u0947\u0902 \u092d\u093e\u0930\u0924\u0940\u092f \u0928\u093e\u0917\u0930\u093f\u0915 \u0938\u0941\u0930\u0915\u094d\u0937\u093e \u0938\u0902\u0939\u093f\u0924\u093e, 2023 \u0915\u0940 \u0927\u093e\u0930\u093e 94 (\u092a\u0939\u0932\u0947 CrPC \u0915\u0940 \u0927\u093e\u0930\u093e 91) \u0915\u0947 \u0905\u0928\u0941\u0938\u093e\u0930 \u0928\u094d\u092f\u093e\u092f\u093e\u0932\u092f \u0938\u092e\u0928, \u092f\u093e \u0925\u093e\u0928\u0947 \u0915\u093e \u092d\u093e\u0930\u0938\u093e\u0927\u0915 \u0905\u0927\u093f\u0915\u093e\u0930\u0940 \u092d\u094c\u0924\u093f\u0915 \u092f\u093e \u0907\u0932\u0947\u0915\u094d\u091f\u094d\u0930\u0949\u0928\u093f\u0915 \u0930\u0942\u092a \u092e\u0947\u0902 \u0932\u093f\u0916\u093f\u0924 \u0906\u0926\u0947\u0936, \u0926\u0947\u0915\u0930 \u0915\u093f\u0938\u0940 \u0926\u0938\u094d\u0924\u093e\u0935\u0947\u091c, \u0907\u0932\u0947\u0915\u094d\u091f\u094d\u0930\u0949\u0928\u093f\u0915 \u0938\u0902\u091a\u093e\u0930 \u092f\u093e \u0938\u0902\u091a\u093e\u0930 \u0921\u093f\u0935\u093e\u0907\u0938 \u0915\u094b \u092a\u094d\u0930\u0938\u094d\u0924\u0941\u0924 \u0915\u0930\u0935\u093e \u0938\u0915\u0924\u093e \u0939\u0948\u0964<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Frequently asked questions<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"schema-faq wp-block-yoast-faq-block\"><div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-1\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">Which section says that an electronic or digital record has the same legal effect, validity and enforceability as other documents?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">Section 61 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023. It says an electronic or digital record cannot be refused in evidence only because it is electronic or digital and, subject to Section 63, has &#8220;the same legal effect, validity and enforceability as other document&#8221;. The Evidence Act had no such section.<\/p> <\/div> <div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-2\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">What is electronic evidence?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">Indian law has no single definition. Under the BSA, &#8220;evidence&#8221; includes statements given electronically and electronic or digital records produced for the court&#8217;s inspection, and a &#8220;document&#8221; includes electronic and digital records. Section 79A of the IT Act speaks of &#8220;electronic form evidence&#8221;, meaning information of probative value stored or transmitted in electronic form.<\/p> <\/div> <div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-3\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">What is Section 63 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">Section 63, &#8220;Admissibility of electronic records&#8221;, replaced Section 65B of the Evidence Act from 1 July 2024. A printout or copy of an electronic record is treated as a document and admitted without the original if four conditions about the device and the information are met and the certificate in the Schedule is filed with it.<\/p> <\/div> <div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-4\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">What is Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, and does it still apply?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">Section 65B governed the admissibility of electronic records; the Supreme Court called it &#8220;a complete code in itself&#8221; (Anvar P.V., 2014). Section 63 BSA has replaced it from 1 July 2024, but Section 65B still applies to any application, trial, inquiry, investigation, proceeding or appeal that was pending immediately before that date (Section 170(2) BSA).<\/p> <\/div> <div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-5\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">How many certificates does the Schedule to the BSA provide for electronic evidence?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">One. The Schedule contains a single form headed &#8220;CERTIFICATE&#8221; in two parts: Part A, &#8220;To be filled by the Party&#8221;, and Part B, &#8220;To be filled by the Expert&#8221;. Both give the device details and the hash value of the record, with the hash report enclosed.<\/p> <\/div> <div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-6\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">Who signs the Section 63 certificate?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">Under Section 63(4)(c), &#8220;a person in charge of the computer or communication device or the management of the relevant activities (whichever is appropriate) and an expert&#8221;. The party signs Part A and the expert signs Part B. The old Section 65B(4) required only a person in a responsible official position.<\/p> <\/div> <div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-7\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">Is a certificate needed if the original device is produced?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">No, under the Supreme Court&#8217;s ruling in Arjun Panditrao Khotkar (2020), given under Section 65B: the certificate &#8220;is unnecessary if the original document itself is produced&#8221;, for example by the owner of a phone or laptop in the witness box. It is required where the record is part of a system or network that cannot be brought to court.<\/p> <\/div> <div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-8\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">Can the certificate be filed later?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">Under the case law on Section 65B, yes, in suitable cases. In Arjun Panditrao Khotkar (2020) the Supreme Court said the judge can direct it to be produced at any stage while the trial hearing is not over, provided the accused is not seriously or irreversibly prejudiced, and a late certificate was allowed in State of Karnataka v. T. Naseer (2023). Section 63(4) of the BSA now says the certificate &#8220;shall be submitted along with the electronic record at each instance where it is being submitted for admission&#8221;, and the firm found no Supreme Court ruling yet on a late certificate under Section 63.<\/p> <\/div> <div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-9\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">What is meant by legal recognition of electronic records?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">Section 4 of the IT Act, 2000, &#8220;Legal recognition of electronic records&#8221;, says that where a law requires information in writing, the requirement is met if it is &#8220;rendered or made available in an electronic form&#8221; and &#8220;accessible so as to be usable for a subsequent reference&#8221;. Section 5 does the same for signatures. Documents in the Act&#8217;s First Schedule, such as wills, are excluded.<\/p> <\/div> <div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-10\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">What are the types of electronic records?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">The BSA&#8217;s illustration to &#8220;document&#8221; lists emails, server logs, documents on computers, laptops or smartphones, messages, websites, locational evidence and voice mail messages. The certificate in the Schedule lists sources such as computer or storage media, DVR, mobile, flash drive, CD or DVD, server and cloud.<\/p> <\/div> <div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-11\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">What is the difference between electronic and digital evidence?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">The law does not distinguish them. The BSA speaks of an &#8220;electronic or digital record&#8221; in several sections and makes such a record subject to Section 63; &#8220;electronic record&#8221; is defined in Section 2(1)(t) of the IT Act, and &#8220;digital record&#8221; is not separately defined.<\/p> <\/div> <div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-12\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">How is electronic evidence different from traditional evidence?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">It has its own route of proof under Sections 61 to 63 BSA, with a certificate and hash value whenever a copy is used. In Anvar P.V. (2014) the Supreme Court said electronic records are more susceptible to tampering and the safeguards ensure their &#8220;source and authenticity&#8221;.<\/p> <\/div> <div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-13\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">When is an electronic record primary evidence?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">Explanations 4 to 7 to Section 57 BSA make primary evidence of each file where a record is stored in multiple files, a record produced from proper custody unless disputed, each stored recording of a video stored and transmitted at once, and each automated storage, including temporary files. The information in the original device is also primary evidence (Arjun Panditrao, 2020).<\/p> <\/div> <div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-14\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">Can emails be used as evidence in court?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">Yes. Emails are named in the BSA&#8217;s illustration to &#8220;document&#8221;. A printout is proved under Section 63 with the certificate unless the original is produced. Under Section 90 the court may presume the email corresponds with the message sent, but &#8220;shall not make any presumption as to the person by whom such message was sent&#8221;.<\/p> <\/div> <div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-15\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">Can social media posts be considered as electronic evidence?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">Yes. The BSA does not name social media, but its illustration to &#8220;document&#8221; includes messages and websites, and Section 61 prevents a record being refused only because it is electronic. A copy of a post is proved under Section 63 with the certificate unless the original is produced.<\/p> <\/div> <div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-16\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">Can call detail records be used without a certificate?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">No. In Pooranmal v. State of Rajasthan (10 March 2026) the Supreme Court held call detail records inadmissible without the certificate under Section 65-B of the Evidence Act (now Section 63 BSA). Navjot Sandhu (2005), which had allowed such printouts under the general rules on secondary evidence, was overruled on this point in Anvar P.V. (2014).<\/p> <\/div> <div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-17\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">Which are the landmark Supreme Court judgments on electronic evidence?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer (18 September 2014) made the Section 65B certificate compulsory for electronic records used as secondary evidence. Arjun Panditrao Khotkar (14 July 2020) confirmed it, overruled Shafhi Mohammad (2018) and held no certificate is needed when the original is produced. Later cases include Ravinder Singh (2022), T. Naseer (2023) and Pooranmal (2026).<\/p> <\/div> <div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-18\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">How do courts verify the authenticity of electronic evidence?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">A copy must first satisfy Section 63, with the certificate and hash value. The court may then rely on an Examiner of Electronic Evidence (Section 39(2)), proof or verification of electronic and digital signatures (Sections 66 and 73) and the presumptions for secure electronic records (Section 86). Genuineness is examined after admission (Anvar P.V.).<\/p> <\/div> <div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-19\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">What is the role of digital forensics in electronic evidence?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">The opinion of an Examiner of Electronic Evidence notified under Section 79A of the IT Act is a relevant fact (Section 39(2) BSA), and an expert must sign Part B of the Section 63 certificate. For offences punishable with seven years or more, Section 176(3) BNSS provides for a forensic expert to visit the crime scene, from a date each State notifies.<\/p> <\/div> <div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-20\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">What is metadata in electronic evidence?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">Neither the BSA nor the IT Act defines metadata. The certificate in the Schedule asks for the source device, its make, model and serial number, its IMEI, UIN, UID, MAC or Cloud ID where applicable, and the hash value of the record. Other technical questions can be answered by expert opinion under Section 39(2).<\/p> <\/div> <div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-21\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">Can encrypted data be used as evidence?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">The BSA has no provision specifically on encrypted data. Under Section 61 an electronic record cannot be refused only because it is electronic, and a copy of it is proved under Section 63 like any other. The IT Act does deal with decryption: under Section 69, the Central or a State Government, or an officer it specially authorises, may, for reasons recorded in writing, direct an agency to &#8220;intercept, monitor or decrypt&#8221; information in any computer resource, and the grounds include the investigation of any offence. The subscriber, intermediary or person in charge of the computer resource must, when called upon, give all facilities and technical assistance, and failure to assist is punishable with imprisonment of up to seven years and fine (Section 69(3) and (4)).<\/p> <\/div> <div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-22\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">If a digital document is edited, can it still be used as evidence?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">The BSA has no specific rule on edited documents. A copy is admissible only if, among other conditions, any malfunction of the device did not affect &#8220;the electronic record or the accuracy of its contents&#8221; (Section 63(2)(c)), and the hash value lets it be matched with the original. The presumption of no alteration applies only to a secure electronic record (Section 86(1)).<\/p> <\/div> <div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-23\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">Can deleted digital data be recovered and used as evidence?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">The BSA does not deal with deleted data as such. Under Explanation 7 to Section 57, where a record is stored in multiple storage spaces in a computer resource, &#8220;each such automated storage, including temporary files, is primary evidence&#8221;. A recovered record must still be proved, with expert opinion where needed.<\/p> <\/div> <div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-24\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">Can data stored in the cloud be used as evidence?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">Yes. The certificate in the Schedule lists &#8220;Cloud&#8221; among the sources of an electronic record and asks for the Cloud ID where applicable. Such a record is proved under Section 63 like any other copy, with the two-part certificate and the hash value.<\/p> <\/div> <div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-25\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">What are the implications of deepfakes for electronic evidence?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">The provisions checked for this guide contain no rule written specifically for deepfakes. Authenticity is tested through the Section 63 certificate and hash value and the opinion of an Examiner of Electronic Evidence under Section 39(2). Admitting a record does not settle whether it is genuine.<\/p> <\/div> <div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-26\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">What role does blockchain technology play in electronic evidence?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">Neither the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam nor the IT Act mentions blockchain, and the firm found no provision on it in the other Acts checked for this guide. The general rules therefore apply: a record cannot be refused only because it is electronic (Section 61 BSA), and a printout or copy of it needs the Section 63 certificate and hash value, unless the original itself is produced. Whether the record is genuine is then for the court, which may rely on the opinion of an Examiner of Electronic Evidence (Section 39(2)).<\/p> <\/div> <div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-27\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">How do artificial intelligence and machine learning affect electronic evidence?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">The provisions checked for this guide (the BSA, the IT Act, the BNSS, the BNS, the Digital Personal Data Protection Act and the Telecommunications Act) do not mention artificial intelligence or machine learning. An electronic record is tested in the same way whatever software produced or processed it: a copy needs the Section 63 certificate and hash value, and the court may rely on the opinion of an Examiner of Electronic Evidence under Section 39(2) BSA. Admitting a record does not settle whether it is genuine.<\/p> <\/div> <div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-28\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">How do privacy laws and other rights affect electronic evidence?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">Privacy is protected as part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 (Justice K.S. Puttaswamy, 2017). In criminal cases records can be obtained by a summons or written order under Section 94 BNSS. Messages carried by a telecommunication service or network may be intercepted by an order under Section 20(2) of the Telecommunications Act, 2023, and information in a computer resource may be intercepted, monitored or decrypted by an order under Section 69 of the IT Act; both require reasons recorded in writing and follow prescribed procedure and safeguards.<\/p> <\/div> <div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-29\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">What does the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 change for electronic records?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">It is coming into force in stages (notification G.S.R. 843(E) of 13 November 2025). Section 12, the right to correction and erasure of personal data, and Section 44(2), which will omit Section 43A of the IT Act, take effect eighteen months from that date, so in October 2026 Section 43A still applies.<\/p> <\/div> <div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-30\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">How is electronic evidence obtained from another country?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">In a criminal investigation, if evidence may be available outside India, a Criminal Court may issue a letter of request to a court or authority there to examine persons and require the production of documents or things (Section 112 BNSS, formerly Section 166A CrPC).<\/p> <\/div> <div class=\"schema-faq-section\" id=\"faq-question-31\"><strong class=\"schema-faq-question\">How do I produce electronic evidence in court?<\/strong> <p class=\"schema-faq-answer\">Produce the original device if you own or operate it and can prove it in the witness box. Otherwise file the copy with the Section 63 certificate (Part A by you, Part B by an expert, with the hash value) each time it is submitted. If someone else holds the record, ask the court to summon it; in criminal cases see Section 94 BNSS.<\/p> <\/div> <\/div>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Conclusion<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Electronic records stand on the same footing as other documents under Section 61 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, subject to Section 63. When the original device is not produced, a copy needs the certificate in the Schedule, filled in by the party and by an expert with the hash value, each time it is submitted for admission. The Supreme Court&#8217;s rulings on Section 65B, from Anvar P.V. to Arjun Panditrao and Pooranmal, continue to guide the courts, and Section 65B itself still governs matters pending immediately before 1 July 2024. Anyone who expects to rely on electronic evidence should preserve the original device or storage, keep a note of how each copy was produced, since the certificate must describe it, and obtain the certificate in good time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Sources used for this post: the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, Sections 1, 2, 20, 39, 41, 56 to 63, 66, 73, 81, 85 to 87, 90, 93, 136, 165, 167, 168 and 170, the Schedule and the Statement of Objects and Reasons (India Code text updated to 6 October 2025, and the Hindi text published in the Gazette of India); the Information Technology Act, 2000, Sections 1, 2, 4, 5, 43, 43A, 66, 69, 72, 72A and 79A and the First Schedule (India Code, English and Hindi texts); the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, Sections 63, 94, 105, 112, 173, 176, 348 and 530, and the firm&#8217;s Gazette-checked comparison of the Evidence Act with the BSA; the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 and the Telecommunications Act, 2023, with their commencement notes (India Code); and the Supreme Court&#8217;s own copies of Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer (18 September 2014), Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India (24 August 2017), Shafhi Mohammad v. State of Himachal Pradesh (30 January and 3 April 2018), Ravinder Singh @ Kaku v. State of Punjab (4 May 2022), State of Karnataka v. T. Naseer (6 November 2023) and Pooranmal v. State of Rajasthan (10 March 2026). State (NCT of Delhi) v. Navjot Sandhu (2005) is described as Anvar P.V. records it, and Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal (14 July 2020) is quoted from the passages reproduced in the later judgments, with its bench from the Supreme Court&#8217;s Digital Supreme Court Reports.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"clf-related\" style=\"margin:28px 0 8px;padding:16px 20px;border:1px solid #e3e3e3;border-radius:6px;background:#fafafa\">\n<p style=\"margin:0 0 8px;font-weight:700\">Related reading<\/p>\n<ul style=\"margin:0;padding-left:20px\">\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/bharatiya-nyaya-sanhita-bharatiya-nagarik-suraksha-sanhita-and-bharatiya-sakshya-bills-an-analysis-of-the-reform-of-indian-justice-system\/\">The 2023 criminal law reform: what the BNS, BNSS and BSA changed<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/indias-2023-legal-reforms-bharatiya-nagarik-suraksha-sanhita-bnss-bharatiya-nyaya-sanhita-bns-and-bharatiya-sakshya-sanhita-bss\/\">BNS, BNSS and BSA: full forms and key facts<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-role-and-admissibility-of-forensic-evidence-in-the-indian-criminal-justice-system\/\">Forensic Evidence in the Indian Criminal Justice System<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/deepfakes-and-indian-law-is-the-it-act-enough-in-the-age-of-ai\/\">Deepfakes and Indian Law<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/cyber-crimes-laws-lawyers-india\/\">Cyber Crimes and Cyber Laws in India<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/surviving-digital-bullying-complete-guide-to-cyberbullying-laws-in-india\/\">Cyberbullying Laws in India<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/digital-arrest-scam-legal-remedies-bns\/\">Digital Arrest Scams and Your Legal Remedies under the BNS<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/right-to-privacy-in-india-exploring-article-21-and-the-landmark-puttaswamy-judgment\/\">Right to Privacy in India and the Puttaswamy Judgment<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/res-gestae-and-section-6-of-the-indian-evidence-act-unveiling-the-essence-of-spontaneous-utterances\/\">Res Gestae: Section 4 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/confessions-and-admissions-in-indian-law-an-examination-of-the-indian-evidence-act\/\">Confessions and Admissions in Indian Law<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/legal-code-comparison-tool\/\">Evidence Act to BSA, IPC to BNS and CrPC to BNSS Comparison Tool<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/legal-sections-explained\/\">Legal Sections Explained<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Emails, messages, call records, CCTV footage, files on a phone or a server: all of these can be evidence in an Indian court. Since 1 July 2024 the law that governs them is the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA), which replaced the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Section 61 of the BSA says that an electronic [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":2865,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_uag_custom_page_level_css":"","_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"site-sidebar-layout":"default","site-content-layout":"","ast-site-content-layout":"default","site-content-style":"default","site-sidebar-style":"default","ast-global-header-display":"","ast-banner-title-visibility":"","ast-main-header-display":"","ast-hfb-above-header-display":"","ast-hfb-below-header-display":"","ast-hfb-mobile-header-display":"","site-post-title":"","ast-breadcrumbs-content":"","ast-featured-img":"","footer-sml-layout":"","ast-disable-related-posts":"","theme-transparent-header-meta":"","adv-header-id-meta":"","stick-header-meta":"","header-above-stick-meta":"","header-main-stick-meta":"","header-below-stick-meta":"","astra-migrate-meta-layouts":"set","ast-page-background-enabled":"default","ast-page-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"ast-content-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"footnotes":""},"categories":[1686,3],"tags":[1690,1549],"class_list":["post-2850","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-indian-evidence-act-1872","category-latest-news","tag-electronic-records-and-evidence","tag-lawyers-delhi"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v28.6 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Electronic Evidence in India: Section 63 BSA and Certificate<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Electronic evidence in India: legal recognition, Section 61 BSA, Section 63 (formerly 65B), the two-part certificate, landmark cases and a Hindi summary.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Electronic Evidence in India: Section 63 BSA and Certificate\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Electronic evidence in India: legal recognition, Section 61 BSA, Section 63 (formerly 65B), the two-part certificate, landmark cases and a Hindi summary.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Century Law Firm Blog\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Century-Law-Firm-103762818279916\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2023-11-25T08:32:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-10-25T15:48:14+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/Navigating-the-Digital-Frontier-The-Complete-Guide-to-Electronic-Records-Evidence-Century-Law-Firm.png\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1024\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"1024\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/png\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@centurylawind\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@centurylawind\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"41 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/15c0285d46c9a3250f689fe9da251747\"},\"headline\":\"Electronic Records and Evidence in India: Legal Recognition, Section 61 BSA, Section 63 BSA (formerly Section 65B), the Certificate and Landmark Supreme Court Cases\",\"datePublished\":\"2023-11-25T08:32:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-10-25T15:48:14+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":9123,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2023\\\/11\\\/Navigating-the-Digital-Frontier-The-Complete-Guide-to-Electronic-Records-Evidence-Century-Law-Firm.png\",\"keywords\":[\"electronic records and evidence\",\"Lawyers Delhi\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Indian Evidence Act (1872)\",\"Latest News\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},{\"@type\":[\"WebPage\",\"FAQPage\"],\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/\",\"name\":\"Electronic Evidence in India: Section 63 BSA and Certificate\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2023\\\/11\\\/Navigating-the-Digital-Frontier-The-Complete-Guide-to-Electronic-Records-Evidence-Century-Law-Firm.png\",\"datePublished\":\"2023-11-25T08:32:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-10-25T15:48:14+00:00\",\"description\":\"Electronic evidence in India: legal recognition, Section 61 BSA, Section 63 (formerly 65B), the two-part certificate, landmark cases and a Hindi summary.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"mainEntity\":[{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-1\"},{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-2\"},{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-3\"},{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-4\"},{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-5\"},{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-6\"},{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-7\"},{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-8\"},{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-9\"},{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-10\"},{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-11\"},{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-12\"},{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-13\"},{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-14\"},{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-15\"},{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-16\"},{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-17\"},{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-18\"},{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-19\"},{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-20\"},{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-21\"},{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-22\"},{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-23\"},{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-24\"},{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-25\"},{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-26\"},{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-27\"},{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-28\"},{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-29\"},{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-30\"},{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-31\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2023\\\/11\\\/Navigating-the-Digital-Frontier-The-Complete-Guide-to-Electronic-Records-Evidence-Century-Law-Firm.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2023\\\/11\\\/Navigating-the-Digital-Frontier-The-Complete-Guide-to-Electronic-Records-Evidence-Century-Law-Firm.png\",\"width\":1024,\"height\":1024,\"caption\":\"Navigating the Digital Frontier The Complete Guide to Electronic Records & Evidence Century Law Firm\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Electronic Records and Evidence in India: Legal Recognition, Section 61 BSA, Section 63 BSA (formerly Section 65B), the Certificate and Landmark Supreme Court Cases\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/\",\"name\":\"Century Law Firm Blog\",\"description\":\"\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Century Law Firm\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2021\\\/05\\\/Century-1.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2021\\\/05\\\/Century-1.png\",\"width\":1801,\"height\":538,\"caption\":\"Century Law Firm\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/Century-Law-Firm-103762818279916\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/centurylawind\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.instagram.com\\\/centurylawind\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.youtube.com\\\/channel\\\/UCC1y40wQB720qJ-eGQLJR3w\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/15c0285d46c9a3250f689fe9da251747\",\"name\":\"admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/e9067e9a8d23d7f8eaaa89c9f746f4e14d55fa71a602bcc4b141c8acf46a3291?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/e9067e9a8d23d7f8eaaa89c9f746f4e14d55fa71a602bcc4b141c8acf46a3291?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/e9067e9a8d23d7f8eaaa89c9f746f4e14d55fa71a602bcc4b141c8acf46a3291?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\"]},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-1\",\"position\":1,\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-1\",\"name\":\"Which section says that an electronic or digital record has the same legal effect, validity and enforceability as other documents?\",\"answerCount\":1,\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"Section 61 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023. It says an electronic or digital record cannot be refused in evidence only because it is electronic or digital and, subject to Section 63, has \\\"the same legal effect, validity and enforceability as other document\\\". The Evidence Act had no such section.\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-2\",\"position\":2,\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-2\",\"name\":\"What is electronic evidence?\",\"answerCount\":1,\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"Indian law has no single definition. Under the BSA, \\\"evidence\\\" includes statements given electronically and electronic or digital records produced for the court's inspection, and a \\\"document\\\" includes electronic and digital records. Section 79A of the IT Act speaks of \\\"electronic form evidence\\\", meaning information of probative value stored or transmitted in electronic form.\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-3\",\"position\":3,\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-3\",\"name\":\"What is Section 63 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam?\",\"answerCount\":1,\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"Section 63, \\\"Admissibility of electronic records\\\", replaced Section 65B of the Evidence Act from 1 July 2024. A printout or copy of an electronic record is treated as a document and admitted without the original if four conditions about the device and the information are met and the certificate in the Schedule is filed with it.\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-4\",\"position\":4,\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-4\",\"name\":\"What is Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, and does it still apply?\",\"answerCount\":1,\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"Section 65B governed the admissibility of electronic records; the Supreme Court called it \\\"a complete code in itself\\\" (Anvar P.V., 2014). Section 63 BSA has replaced it from 1 July 2024, but Section 65B still applies to any application, trial, inquiry, investigation, proceeding or appeal that was pending immediately before that date (Section 170(2) BSA).\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-5\",\"position\":5,\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-5\",\"name\":\"How many certificates does the Schedule to the BSA provide for electronic evidence?\",\"answerCount\":1,\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"One. The Schedule contains a single form headed \\\"CERTIFICATE\\\" in two parts: Part A, \\\"To be filled by the Party\\\", and Part B, \\\"To be filled by the Expert\\\". Both give the device details and the hash value of the record, with the hash report enclosed.\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-6\",\"position\":6,\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-6\",\"name\":\"Who signs the Section 63 certificate?\",\"answerCount\":1,\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"Under Section 63(4)(c), \\\"a person in charge of the computer or communication device or the management of the relevant activities (whichever is appropriate) and an expert\\\". The party signs Part A and the expert signs Part B. The old Section 65B(4) required only a person in a responsible official position.\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-7\",\"position\":7,\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-7\",\"name\":\"Is a certificate needed if the original device is produced?\",\"answerCount\":1,\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"No, under the Supreme Court's ruling in Arjun Panditrao Khotkar (2020), given under Section 65B: the certificate \\\"is unnecessary if the original document itself is produced\\\", for example by the owner of a phone or laptop in the witness box. It is required where the record is part of a system or network that cannot be brought to court.\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-8\",\"position\":8,\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-8\",\"name\":\"Can the certificate be filed later?\",\"answerCount\":1,\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"Under the case law on Section 65B, yes, in suitable cases. In Arjun Panditrao Khotkar (2020) the Supreme Court said the judge can direct it to be produced at any stage while the trial hearing is not over, provided the accused is not seriously or irreversibly prejudiced, and a late certificate was allowed in State of Karnataka v. T. Naseer (2023). Section 63(4) of the BSA now says the certificate \\\"shall be submitted along with the electronic record at each instance where it is being submitted for admission\\\", and the firm found no Supreme Court ruling yet on a late certificate under Section 63.\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-9\",\"position\":9,\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-9\",\"name\":\"What is meant by legal recognition of electronic records?\",\"answerCount\":1,\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"Section 4 of the IT Act, 2000, \\\"Legal recognition of electronic records\\\", says that where a law requires information in writing, the requirement is met if it is \\\"rendered or made available in an electronic form\\\" and \\\"accessible so as to be usable for a subsequent reference\\\". Section 5 does the same for signatures. Documents in the Act's First Schedule, such as wills, are excluded.\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-10\",\"position\":10,\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-10\",\"name\":\"What are the types of electronic records?\",\"answerCount\":1,\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"The BSA's illustration to \\\"document\\\" lists emails, server logs, documents on computers, laptops or smartphones, messages, websites, locational evidence and voice mail messages. The certificate in the Schedule lists sources such as computer or storage media, DVR, mobile, flash drive, CD or DVD, server and cloud.\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-11\",\"position\":11,\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-11\",\"name\":\"What is the difference between electronic and digital evidence?\",\"answerCount\":1,\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"The law does not distinguish them. The BSA speaks of an \\\"electronic or digital record\\\" in several sections and makes such a record subject to Section 63; \\\"electronic record\\\" is defined in Section 2(1)(t) of the IT Act, and \\\"digital record\\\" is not separately defined.\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-12\",\"position\":12,\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-12\",\"name\":\"How is electronic evidence different from traditional evidence?\",\"answerCount\":1,\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"It has its own route of proof under Sections 61 to 63 BSA, with a certificate and hash value whenever a copy is used. In Anvar P.V. (2014) the Supreme Court said electronic records are more susceptible to tampering and the safeguards ensure their \\\"source and authenticity\\\".\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-13\",\"position\":13,\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-13\",\"name\":\"When is an electronic record primary evidence?\",\"answerCount\":1,\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"Explanations 4 to 7 to Section 57 BSA make primary evidence of each file where a record is stored in multiple files, a record produced from proper custody unless disputed, each stored recording of a video stored and transmitted at once, and each automated storage, including temporary files. The information in the original device is also primary evidence (Arjun Panditrao, 2020).\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-14\",\"position\":14,\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-14\",\"name\":\"Can emails be used as evidence in court?\",\"answerCount\":1,\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"Yes. Emails are named in the BSA's illustration to \\\"document\\\". A printout is proved under Section 63 with the certificate unless the original is produced. Under Section 90 the court may presume the email corresponds with the message sent, but \\\"shall not make any presumption as to the person by whom such message was sent\\\".\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-15\",\"position\":15,\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-15\",\"name\":\"Can social media posts be considered as electronic evidence?\",\"answerCount\":1,\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"Yes. The BSA does not name social media, but its illustration to \\\"document\\\" includes messages and websites, and Section 61 prevents a record being refused only because it is electronic. A copy of a post is proved under Section 63 with the certificate unless the original is produced.\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-16\",\"position\":16,\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-16\",\"name\":\"Can call detail records be used without a certificate?\",\"answerCount\":1,\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"No. In Pooranmal v. State of Rajasthan (10 March 2026) the Supreme Court held call detail records inadmissible without the certificate under Section 65-B of the Evidence Act (now Section 63 BSA). Navjot Sandhu (2005), which had allowed such printouts under the general rules on secondary evidence, was overruled on this point in Anvar P.V. (2014).\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-17\",\"position\":17,\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-17\",\"name\":\"Which are the landmark Supreme Court judgments on electronic evidence?\",\"answerCount\":1,\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer (18 September 2014) made the Section 65B certificate compulsory for electronic records used as secondary evidence. Arjun Panditrao Khotkar (14 July 2020) confirmed it, overruled Shafhi Mohammad (2018) and held no certificate is needed when the original is produced. Later cases include Ravinder Singh (2022), T. Naseer (2023) and Pooranmal (2026).\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-18\",\"position\":18,\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-18\",\"name\":\"How do courts verify the authenticity of electronic evidence?\",\"answerCount\":1,\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"A copy must first satisfy Section 63, with the certificate and hash value. The court may then rely on an Examiner of Electronic Evidence (Section 39(2)), proof or verification of electronic and digital signatures (Sections 66 and 73) and the presumptions for secure electronic records (Section 86). Genuineness is examined after admission (Anvar P.V.).\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-19\",\"position\":19,\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-19\",\"name\":\"What is the role of digital forensics in electronic evidence?\",\"answerCount\":1,\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"The opinion of an Examiner of Electronic Evidence notified under Section 79A of the IT Act is a relevant fact (Section 39(2) BSA), and an expert must sign Part B of the Section 63 certificate. For offences punishable with seven years or more, Section 176(3) BNSS provides for a forensic expert to visit the crime scene, from a date each State notifies.\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-20\",\"position\":20,\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-20\",\"name\":\"What is metadata in electronic evidence?\",\"answerCount\":1,\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"Neither the BSA nor the IT Act defines metadata. The certificate in the Schedule asks for the source device, its make, model and serial number, its IMEI, UIN, UID, MAC or Cloud ID where applicable, and the hash value of the record. Other technical questions can be answered by expert opinion under Section 39(2).\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-21\",\"position\":21,\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-21\",\"name\":\"Can encrypted data be used as evidence?\",\"answerCount\":1,\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"The BSA has no provision specifically on encrypted data. Under Section 61 an electronic record cannot be refused only because it is electronic, and a copy of it is proved under Section 63 like any other. The IT Act does deal with decryption: under Section 69, the Central or a State Government, or an officer it specially authorises, may, for reasons recorded in writing, direct an agency to \\\"intercept, monitor or decrypt\\\" information in any computer resource, and the grounds include the investigation of any offence. The subscriber, intermediary or person in charge of the computer resource must, when called upon, give all facilities and technical assistance, and failure to assist is punishable with imprisonment of up to seven years and fine (Section 69(3) and (4)).\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-22\",\"position\":22,\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-22\",\"name\":\"If a digital document is edited, can it still be used as evidence?\",\"answerCount\":1,\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"The BSA has no specific rule on edited documents. A copy is admissible only if, among other conditions, any malfunction of the device did not affect \\\"the electronic record or the accuracy of its contents\\\" (Section 63(2)(c)), and the hash value lets it be matched with the original. The presumption of no alteration applies only to a secure electronic record (Section 86(1)).\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-23\",\"position\":23,\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-23\",\"name\":\"Can deleted digital data be recovered and used as evidence?\",\"answerCount\":1,\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"The BSA does not deal with deleted data as such. Under Explanation 7 to Section 57, where a record is stored in multiple storage spaces in a computer resource, \\\"each such automated storage, including temporary files, is primary evidence\\\". A recovered record must still be proved, with expert opinion where needed.\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-24\",\"position\":24,\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-24\",\"name\":\"Can data stored in the cloud be used as evidence?\",\"answerCount\":1,\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"Yes. The certificate in the Schedule lists \\\"Cloud\\\" among the sources of an electronic record and asks for the Cloud ID where applicable. Such a record is proved under Section 63 like any other copy, with the two-part certificate and the hash value.\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-25\",\"position\":25,\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-25\",\"name\":\"What are the implications of deepfakes for electronic evidence?\",\"answerCount\":1,\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"The provisions checked for this guide contain no rule written specifically for deepfakes. Authenticity is tested through the Section 63 certificate and hash value and the opinion of an Examiner of Electronic Evidence under Section 39(2). Admitting a record does not settle whether it is genuine.\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-26\",\"position\":26,\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-26\",\"name\":\"What role does blockchain technology play in electronic evidence?\",\"answerCount\":1,\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"Neither the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam nor the IT Act mentions blockchain, and the firm found no provision on it in the other Acts checked for this guide. The general rules therefore apply: a record cannot be refused only because it is electronic (Section 61 BSA), and a printout or copy of it needs the Section 63 certificate and hash value, unless the original itself is produced. Whether the record is genuine is then for the court, which may rely on the opinion of an Examiner of Electronic Evidence (Section 39(2)).\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-27\",\"position\":27,\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-27\",\"name\":\"How do artificial intelligence and machine learning affect electronic evidence?\",\"answerCount\":1,\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"The provisions checked for this guide (the BSA, the IT Act, the BNSS, the BNS, the Digital Personal Data Protection Act and the Telecommunications Act) do not mention artificial intelligence or machine learning. An electronic record is tested in the same way whatever software produced or processed it: a copy needs the Section 63 certificate and hash value, and the court may rely on the opinion of an Examiner of Electronic Evidence under Section 39(2) BSA. Admitting a record does not settle whether it is genuine.\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-28\",\"position\":28,\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-28\",\"name\":\"How do privacy laws and other rights affect electronic evidence?\",\"answerCount\":1,\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"Privacy is protected as part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 (Justice K.S. Puttaswamy, 2017). In criminal cases records can be obtained by a summons or written order under Section 94 BNSS. Messages carried by a telecommunication service or network may be intercepted by an order under Section 20(2) of the Telecommunications Act, 2023, and information in a computer resource may be intercepted, monitored or decrypted by an order under Section 69 of the IT Act; both require reasons recorded in writing and follow prescribed procedure and safeguards.\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-29\",\"position\":29,\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-29\",\"name\":\"What does the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 change for electronic records?\",\"answerCount\":1,\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"It is coming into force in stages (notification G.S.R. 843(E) of 13 November 2025). Section 12, the right to correction and erasure of personal data, and Section 44(2), which will omit Section 43A of the IT Act, take effect eighteen months from that date, so in October 2026 Section 43A still applies.\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-30\",\"position\":30,\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-30\",\"name\":\"How is electronic evidence obtained from another country?\",\"answerCount\":1,\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"In a criminal investigation, if evidence may be available outside India, a Criminal Court may issue a letter of request to a court or authority there to examine persons and require the production of documents or things (Section 112 BNSS, formerly Section 166A CrPC).\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-31\",\"position\":31,\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.centurylawfirm.in\\\/blog\\\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\\\/#faq-question-31\",\"name\":\"How do I produce electronic evidence in court?\",\"answerCount\":1,\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"Produce the original device if you own or operate it and can prove it in the witness box. Otherwise file the copy with the Section 63 certificate (Part A by you, Part B by an expert, with the hash value) each time it is submitted. If someone else holds the record, ask the court to summon it; in criminal cases see Section 94 BNSS.\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Electronic Evidence in India: Section 63 BSA and Certificate","description":"Electronic evidence in India: legal recognition, Section 61 BSA, Section 63 (formerly 65B), the two-part certificate, landmark cases and a Hindi summary.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Electronic Evidence in India: Section 63 BSA and Certificate","og_description":"Electronic evidence in India: legal recognition, Section 61 BSA, Section 63 (formerly 65B), the two-part certificate, landmark cases and a Hindi summary.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/","og_site_name":"Century Law Firm Blog","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Century-Law-Firm-103762818279916","article_published_time":"2023-11-25T08:32:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2026-10-25T15:48:14+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1024,"height":1024,"url":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/Navigating-the-Digital-Frontier-The-Complete-Guide-to-Electronic-Records-Evidence-Century-Law-Firm.png","type":"image\/png"}],"author":"admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@centurylawind","twitter_site":"@centurylawind","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"admin","Est. reading time":"41 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/"},"author":{"name":"admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/15c0285d46c9a3250f689fe9da251747"},"headline":"Electronic Records and Evidence in India: Legal Recognition, Section 61 BSA, Section 63 BSA (formerly Section 65B), the Certificate and Landmark Supreme Court Cases","datePublished":"2023-11-25T08:32:00+00:00","dateModified":"2026-10-25T15:48:14+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/"},"wordCount":9123,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/Navigating-the-Digital-Frontier-The-Complete-Guide-to-Electronic-Records-Evidence-Century-Law-Firm.png","keywords":["electronic records and evidence","Lawyers Delhi"],"articleSection":["Indian Evidence Act (1872)","Latest News"],"inLanguage":"en"},{"@type":["WebPage","FAQPage"],"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/","url":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/","name":"Electronic Evidence in India: Section 63 BSA and Certificate","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/Navigating-the-Digital-Frontier-The-Complete-Guide-to-Electronic-Records-Evidence-Century-Law-Firm.png","datePublished":"2023-11-25T08:32:00+00:00","dateModified":"2026-10-25T15:48:14+00:00","description":"Electronic evidence in India: legal recognition, Section 61 BSA, Section 63 (formerly 65B), the two-part certificate, landmark cases and a Hindi summary.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#breadcrumb"},"mainEntity":[{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-1"},{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-2"},{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-3"},{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-4"},{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-5"},{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-6"},{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-7"},{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-8"},{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-9"},{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-10"},{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-11"},{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-12"},{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-13"},{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-14"},{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-15"},{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-16"},{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-17"},{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-18"},{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-19"},{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-20"},{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-21"},{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-22"},{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-23"},{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-24"},{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-25"},{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-26"},{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-27"},{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-28"},{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-29"},{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-30"},{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-31"}],"inLanguage":"en","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/Navigating-the-Digital-Frontier-The-Complete-Guide-to-Electronic-Records-Evidence-Century-Law-Firm.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/Navigating-the-Digital-Frontier-The-Complete-Guide-to-Electronic-Records-Evidence-Century-Law-Firm.png","width":1024,"height":1024,"caption":"Navigating the Digital Frontier The Complete Guide to Electronic Records & Evidence Century Law Firm"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Electronic Records and Evidence in India: Legal Recognition, Section 61 BSA, Section 63 BSA (formerly Section 65B), the Certificate and Landmark Supreme Court Cases"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/","name":"Century Law Firm Blog","description":"","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/#organization","name":"Century Law Firm","url":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/05\/Century-1.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/05\/Century-1.png","width":1801,"height":538,"caption":"Century Law Firm"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Century-Law-Firm-103762818279916","https:\/\/x.com\/centurylawind","https:\/\/www.instagram.com\/centurylawind\/","https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/channel\/UCC1y40wQB720qJ-eGQLJR3w"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/15c0285d46c9a3250f689fe9da251747","name":"admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/e9067e9a8d23d7f8eaaa89c9f746f4e14d55fa71a602bcc4b141c8acf46a3291?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/e9067e9a8d23d7f8eaaa89c9f746f4e14d55fa71a602bcc4b141c8acf46a3291?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/e9067e9a8d23d7f8eaaa89c9f746f4e14d55fa71a602bcc4b141c8acf46a3291?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog"]},{"@type":"Question","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-1","position":1,"url":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-1","name":"Which section says that an electronic or digital record has the same legal effect, validity and enforceability as other documents?","answerCount":1,"acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Section 61 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023. It says an electronic or digital record cannot be refused in evidence only because it is electronic or digital and, subject to Section 63, has \"the same legal effect, validity and enforceability as other document\". The Evidence Act had no such section.","inLanguage":"en"},"inLanguage":"en"},{"@type":"Question","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-2","position":2,"url":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-2","name":"What is electronic evidence?","answerCount":1,"acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Indian law has no single definition. Under the BSA, \"evidence\" includes statements given electronically and electronic or digital records produced for the court's inspection, and a \"document\" includes electronic and digital records. Section 79A of the IT Act speaks of \"electronic form evidence\", meaning information of probative value stored or transmitted in electronic form.","inLanguage":"en"},"inLanguage":"en"},{"@type":"Question","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-3","position":3,"url":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-3","name":"What is Section 63 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam?","answerCount":1,"acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Section 63, \"Admissibility of electronic records\", replaced Section 65B of the Evidence Act from 1 July 2024. A printout or copy of an electronic record is treated as a document and admitted without the original if four conditions about the device and the information are met and the certificate in the Schedule is filed with it.","inLanguage":"en"},"inLanguage":"en"},{"@type":"Question","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-4","position":4,"url":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-4","name":"What is Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, and does it still apply?","answerCount":1,"acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Section 65B governed the admissibility of electronic records; the Supreme Court called it \"a complete code in itself\" (Anvar P.V., 2014). Section 63 BSA has replaced it from 1 July 2024, but Section 65B still applies to any application, trial, inquiry, investigation, proceeding or appeal that was pending immediately before that date (Section 170(2) BSA).","inLanguage":"en"},"inLanguage":"en"},{"@type":"Question","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-5","position":5,"url":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-5","name":"How many certificates does the Schedule to the BSA provide for electronic evidence?","answerCount":1,"acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"One. The Schedule contains a single form headed \"CERTIFICATE\" in two parts: Part A, \"To be filled by the Party\", and Part B, \"To be filled by the Expert\". Both give the device details and the hash value of the record, with the hash report enclosed.","inLanguage":"en"},"inLanguage":"en"},{"@type":"Question","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-6","position":6,"url":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-6","name":"Who signs the Section 63 certificate?","answerCount":1,"acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Under Section 63(4)(c), \"a person in charge of the computer or communication device or the management of the relevant activities (whichever is appropriate) and an expert\". The party signs Part A and the expert signs Part B. The old Section 65B(4) required only a person in a responsible official position.","inLanguage":"en"},"inLanguage":"en"},{"@type":"Question","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-7","position":7,"url":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-7","name":"Is a certificate needed if the original device is produced?","answerCount":1,"acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"No, under the Supreme Court's ruling in Arjun Panditrao Khotkar (2020), given under Section 65B: the certificate \"is unnecessary if the original document itself is produced\", for example by the owner of a phone or laptop in the witness box. It is required where the record is part of a system or network that cannot be brought to court.","inLanguage":"en"},"inLanguage":"en"},{"@type":"Question","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-8","position":8,"url":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-8","name":"Can the certificate be filed later?","answerCount":1,"acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Under the case law on Section 65B, yes, in suitable cases. In Arjun Panditrao Khotkar (2020) the Supreme Court said the judge can direct it to be produced at any stage while the trial hearing is not over, provided the accused is not seriously or irreversibly prejudiced, and a late certificate was allowed in State of Karnataka v. T. Naseer (2023). Section 63(4) of the BSA now says the certificate \"shall be submitted along with the electronic record at each instance where it is being submitted for admission\", and the firm found no Supreme Court ruling yet on a late certificate under Section 63.","inLanguage":"en"},"inLanguage":"en"},{"@type":"Question","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-9","position":9,"url":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-9","name":"What is meant by legal recognition of electronic records?","answerCount":1,"acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Section 4 of the IT Act, 2000, \"Legal recognition of electronic records\", says that where a law requires information in writing, the requirement is met if it is \"rendered or made available in an electronic form\" and \"accessible so as to be usable for a subsequent reference\". Section 5 does the same for signatures. Documents in the Act's First Schedule, such as wills, are excluded.","inLanguage":"en"},"inLanguage":"en"},{"@type":"Question","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-10","position":10,"url":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-10","name":"What are the types of electronic records?","answerCount":1,"acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"The BSA's illustration to \"document\" lists emails, server logs, documents on computers, laptops or smartphones, messages, websites, locational evidence and voice mail messages. The certificate in the Schedule lists sources such as computer or storage media, DVR, mobile, flash drive, CD or DVD, server and cloud.","inLanguage":"en"},"inLanguage":"en"},{"@type":"Question","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-11","position":11,"url":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-11","name":"What is the difference between electronic and digital evidence?","answerCount":1,"acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"The law does not distinguish them. The BSA speaks of an \"electronic or digital record\" in several sections and makes such a record subject to Section 63; \"electronic record\" is defined in Section 2(1)(t) of the IT Act, and \"digital record\" is not separately defined.","inLanguage":"en"},"inLanguage":"en"},{"@type":"Question","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-12","position":12,"url":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-12","name":"How is electronic evidence different from traditional evidence?","answerCount":1,"acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"It has its own route of proof under Sections 61 to 63 BSA, with a certificate and hash value whenever a copy is used. In Anvar P.V. (2014) the Supreme Court said electronic records are more susceptible to tampering and the safeguards ensure their \"source and authenticity\".","inLanguage":"en"},"inLanguage":"en"},{"@type":"Question","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-13","position":13,"url":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-13","name":"When is an electronic record primary evidence?","answerCount":1,"acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Explanations 4 to 7 to Section 57 BSA make primary evidence of each file where a record is stored in multiple files, a record produced from proper custody unless disputed, each stored recording of a video stored and transmitted at once, and each automated storage, including temporary files. The information in the original device is also primary evidence (Arjun Panditrao, 2020).","inLanguage":"en"},"inLanguage":"en"},{"@type":"Question","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-14","position":14,"url":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-14","name":"Can emails be used as evidence in court?","answerCount":1,"acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Yes. Emails are named in the BSA's illustration to \"document\". A printout is proved under Section 63 with the certificate unless the original is produced. Under Section 90 the court may presume the email corresponds with the message sent, but \"shall not make any presumption as to the person by whom such message was sent\".","inLanguage":"en"},"inLanguage":"en"},{"@type":"Question","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-15","position":15,"url":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-15","name":"Can social media posts be considered as electronic evidence?","answerCount":1,"acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Yes. The BSA does not name social media, but its illustration to \"document\" includes messages and websites, and Section 61 prevents a record being refused only because it is electronic. A copy of a post is proved under Section 63 with the certificate unless the original is produced.","inLanguage":"en"},"inLanguage":"en"},{"@type":"Question","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-16","position":16,"url":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-16","name":"Can call detail records be used without a certificate?","answerCount":1,"acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"No. In Pooranmal v. State of Rajasthan (10 March 2026) the Supreme Court held call detail records inadmissible without the certificate under Section 65-B of the Evidence Act (now Section 63 BSA). Navjot Sandhu (2005), which had allowed such printouts under the general rules on secondary evidence, was overruled on this point in Anvar P.V. (2014).","inLanguage":"en"},"inLanguage":"en"},{"@type":"Question","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-17","position":17,"url":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-17","name":"Which are the landmark Supreme Court judgments on electronic evidence?","answerCount":1,"acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer (18 September 2014) made the Section 65B certificate compulsory for electronic records used as secondary evidence. Arjun Panditrao Khotkar (14 July 2020) confirmed it, overruled Shafhi Mohammad (2018) and held no certificate is needed when the original is produced. Later cases include Ravinder Singh (2022), T. Naseer (2023) and Pooranmal (2026).","inLanguage":"en"},"inLanguage":"en"},{"@type":"Question","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-18","position":18,"url":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-18","name":"How do courts verify the authenticity of electronic evidence?","answerCount":1,"acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"A copy must first satisfy Section 63, with the certificate and hash value. The court may then rely on an Examiner of Electronic Evidence (Section 39(2)), proof or verification of electronic and digital signatures (Sections 66 and 73) and the presumptions for secure electronic records (Section 86). Genuineness is examined after admission (Anvar P.V.).","inLanguage":"en"},"inLanguage":"en"},{"@type":"Question","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-19","position":19,"url":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-19","name":"What is the role of digital forensics in electronic evidence?","answerCount":1,"acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"The opinion of an Examiner of Electronic Evidence notified under Section 79A of the IT Act is a relevant fact (Section 39(2) BSA), and an expert must sign Part B of the Section 63 certificate. For offences punishable with seven years or more, Section 176(3) BNSS provides for a forensic expert to visit the crime scene, from a date each State notifies.","inLanguage":"en"},"inLanguage":"en"},{"@type":"Question","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-20","position":20,"url":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-20","name":"What is metadata in electronic evidence?","answerCount":1,"acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Neither the BSA nor the IT Act defines metadata. The certificate in the Schedule asks for the source device, its make, model and serial number, its IMEI, UIN, UID, MAC or Cloud ID where applicable, and the hash value of the record. Other technical questions can be answered by expert opinion under Section 39(2).","inLanguage":"en"},"inLanguage":"en"},{"@type":"Question","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-21","position":21,"url":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-21","name":"Can encrypted data be used as evidence?","answerCount":1,"acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"The BSA has no provision specifically on encrypted data. Under Section 61 an electronic record cannot be refused only because it is electronic, and a copy of it is proved under Section 63 like any other. The IT Act does deal with decryption: under Section 69, the Central or a State Government, or an officer it specially authorises, may, for reasons recorded in writing, direct an agency to \"intercept, monitor or decrypt\" information in any computer resource, and the grounds include the investigation of any offence. The subscriber, intermediary or person in charge of the computer resource must, when called upon, give all facilities and technical assistance, and failure to assist is punishable with imprisonment of up to seven years and fine (Section 69(3) and (4)).","inLanguage":"en"},"inLanguage":"en"},{"@type":"Question","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-22","position":22,"url":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-22","name":"If a digital document is edited, can it still be used as evidence?","answerCount":1,"acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"The BSA has no specific rule on edited documents. A copy is admissible only if, among other conditions, any malfunction of the device did not affect \"the electronic record or the accuracy of its contents\" (Section 63(2)(c)), and the hash value lets it be matched with the original. The presumption of no alteration applies only to a secure electronic record (Section 86(1)).","inLanguage":"en"},"inLanguage":"en"},{"@type":"Question","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-23","position":23,"url":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-23","name":"Can deleted digital data be recovered and used as evidence?","answerCount":1,"acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"The BSA does not deal with deleted data as such. Under Explanation 7 to Section 57, where a record is stored in multiple storage spaces in a computer resource, \"each such automated storage, including temporary files, is primary evidence\". A recovered record must still be proved, with expert opinion where needed.","inLanguage":"en"},"inLanguage":"en"},{"@type":"Question","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-24","position":24,"url":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-24","name":"Can data stored in the cloud be used as evidence?","answerCount":1,"acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Yes. The certificate in the Schedule lists \"Cloud\" among the sources of an electronic record and asks for the Cloud ID where applicable. Such a record is proved under Section 63 like any other copy, with the two-part certificate and the hash value.","inLanguage":"en"},"inLanguage":"en"},{"@type":"Question","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-25","position":25,"url":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-25","name":"What are the implications of deepfakes for electronic evidence?","answerCount":1,"acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"The provisions checked for this guide contain no rule written specifically for deepfakes. Authenticity is tested through the Section 63 certificate and hash value and the opinion of an Examiner of Electronic Evidence under Section 39(2). Admitting a record does not settle whether it is genuine.","inLanguage":"en"},"inLanguage":"en"},{"@type":"Question","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-26","position":26,"url":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-26","name":"What role does blockchain technology play in electronic evidence?","answerCount":1,"acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Neither the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam nor the IT Act mentions blockchain, and the firm found no provision on it in the other Acts checked for this guide. The general rules therefore apply: a record cannot be refused only because it is electronic (Section 61 BSA), and a printout or copy of it needs the Section 63 certificate and hash value, unless the original itself is produced. Whether the record is genuine is then for the court, which may rely on the opinion of an Examiner of Electronic Evidence (Section 39(2)).","inLanguage":"en"},"inLanguage":"en"},{"@type":"Question","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-27","position":27,"url":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-27","name":"How do artificial intelligence and machine learning affect electronic evidence?","answerCount":1,"acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"The provisions checked for this guide (the BSA, the IT Act, the BNSS, the BNS, the Digital Personal Data Protection Act and the Telecommunications Act) do not mention artificial intelligence or machine learning. An electronic record is tested in the same way whatever software produced or processed it: a copy needs the Section 63 certificate and hash value, and the court may rely on the opinion of an Examiner of Electronic Evidence under Section 39(2) BSA. Admitting a record does not settle whether it is genuine.","inLanguage":"en"},"inLanguage":"en"},{"@type":"Question","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-28","position":28,"url":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-28","name":"How do privacy laws and other rights affect electronic evidence?","answerCount":1,"acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Privacy is protected as part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 (Justice K.S. Puttaswamy, 2017). In criminal cases records can be obtained by a summons or written order under Section 94 BNSS. Messages carried by a telecommunication service or network may be intercepted by an order under Section 20(2) of the Telecommunications Act, 2023, and information in a computer resource may be intercepted, monitored or decrypted by an order under Section 69 of the IT Act; both require reasons recorded in writing and follow prescribed procedure and safeguards.","inLanguage":"en"},"inLanguage":"en"},{"@type":"Question","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-29","position":29,"url":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-29","name":"What does the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 change for electronic records?","answerCount":1,"acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"It is coming into force in stages (notification G.S.R. 843(E) of 13 November 2025). Section 12, the right to correction and erasure of personal data, and Section 44(2), which will omit Section 43A of the IT Act, take effect eighteen months from that date, so in October 2026 Section 43A still applies.","inLanguage":"en"},"inLanguage":"en"},{"@type":"Question","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-30","position":30,"url":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-30","name":"How is electronic evidence obtained from another country?","answerCount":1,"acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"In a criminal investigation, if evidence may be available outside India, a Criminal Court may issue a letter of request to a court or authority there to examine persons and require the production of documents or things (Section 112 BNSS, formerly Section 166A CrPC).","inLanguage":"en"},"inLanguage":"en"},{"@type":"Question","@id":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-31","position":31,"url":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/the-complete-guide-to-electronic-records-evidence-in-indian-law\/#faq-question-31","name":"How do I produce electronic evidence in court?","answerCount":1,"acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Produce the original device if you own or operate it and can prove it in the witness box. Otherwise file the copy with the Section 63 certificate (Part A by you, Part B by an expert, with the hash value) each time it is submitted. If someone else holds the record, ask the court to summon it; in criminal cases see Section 94 BNSS.","inLanguage":"en"},"inLanguage":"en"}]}},"uagb_featured_image_src":{"full":["https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/Navigating-the-Digital-Frontier-The-Complete-Guide-to-Electronic-Records-Evidence-Century-Law-Firm.png",1024,1024,false],"thumbnail":["https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/Navigating-the-Digital-Frontier-The-Complete-Guide-to-Electronic-Records-Evidence-Century-Law-Firm-150x150.png",150,150,true],"medium":["https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/Navigating-the-Digital-Frontier-The-Complete-Guide-to-Electronic-Records-Evidence-Century-Law-Firm-300x300.png",300,300,true],"medium_large":["https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/Navigating-the-Digital-Frontier-The-Complete-Guide-to-Electronic-Records-Evidence-Century-Law-Firm-768x768.png",768,768,true],"large":["https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/Navigating-the-Digital-Frontier-The-Complete-Guide-to-Electronic-Records-Evidence-Century-Law-Firm.png",1024,1024,false],"1536x1536":["https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/Navigating-the-Digital-Frontier-The-Complete-Guide-to-Electronic-Records-Evidence-Century-Law-Firm.png",1024,1024,false],"2048x2048":["https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/Navigating-the-Digital-Frontier-The-Complete-Guide-to-Electronic-Records-Evidence-Century-Law-Firm.png",1024,1024,false]},"uagb_author_info":{"display_name":"admin","author_link":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/author\/admin\/"},"uagb_comment_info":0,"uagb_excerpt":"Emails, messages, call records, CCTV footage, files on a phone or a server: all of these can be evidence in an Indian court. Since 1 July 2024 the law that governs them is the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA), which replaced the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Section 61 of the BSA says that an electronic&hellip;","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2850","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2850"}],"version-history":[{"count":17,"href":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2850\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5827,"href":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2850\/revisions\/5827"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2865"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2850"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2850"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.centurylawfirm.in\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2850"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}