Digital Evidence in Criminal Trials: Challenges and Legal Framework in India

Author: Yashasvi, Law College Dehradun

To the Point


Digital evidence has become pivotal in modern criminal trials, thanks to technological advancements. From emails to metadata, digital footprints often provide crucial information. However, challenges related to its authenticity, admissibility, and legal recognition persist. This article explores the legal framework governing digital evidence in India, its challenges, and key judicial precedents.

The Proof


The Information Technology Act, 2000 (IT Act) and the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (as amended in 2000) serve as the backbone for the admissibility of digital evidence in India. Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act specifies the requirements for the admissibility of electronic records. The judiciary’s reliance on these provisions underscores their relevance in criminal proceedings.

Abstract


Digital evidence has reshaped the landscape of criminal jurisprudence. While Indian courts have progressively recognized electronic evidence, questions regarding tampering, data integrity, and procedural lapses persist. This article examines the legal provisions governing digital evidence and highlights landmark cases that have shaped its admissibility and evidentiary value.

Case Laws

1. Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer & Others (2014)
The Supreme Court clarified the mandatory requirement for compliance with Section 65B to admit electronic evidence. It held that oral evidence or traditional methods are insufficient to prove digital records unless accompanied by a valid certificate under Section 65B(4).

2. Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal (2020)
This case reaffirmed the Anvar P.V. judgment, emphasizing that electronic records must be certified for admissibility. It also allowed courts to summon such certification when the party presenting the evidence lacks control over the device.

3. Tomaso Bruno v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2015)
The Supreme Court highlighted the evidentiary significance of CCTV footage, underscoring the need for its careful handling to ensure its reliability and integrity.

4. Shafhi Mohammad v. State of Himachal Pradesh (2018)
This judgment introduced flexibility by allowing electronic evidence without a Section 65B certificate when obtaining such certification was impractical. However, the ruling was partially diluted by subsequent clarifications in the Arjun Panditrao case.

Conclusion
D

igital evidence has undoubtedly revolutionized the legal field, but its admissibility and reliability remain contentious. Compliance with Section 65B certification requirements, the evolving judicial interpretations, and the potential for tampering demand robust procedural safeguards. Policymakers must address these concerns by updating legal frameworks and implementing stringent standards for handling digital evidence.

FAQS

Q1. What is Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act?
Section 65B provides the legal basis for admitting electronic records as evidence. It mandates a certification process to ensure the authenticity and integrity of digital evidence.

Q2. Is digital evidence admissible without a Section 65B certificate?
While earlier judgments (e.g., Shafhi Mohammad) allowed flexibility, the Arjun Panditrao case reinstated that certification is mandatory, except in exceptional circumstances.

Q3. What are common challenges with digital evidence in trials?
Challenges include tampering risks, establishing authenticity, and procedural lapses during collection and submission.

Q4. How has the judiciary addressed the authenticity of digital evidence?
Through landmark judgments like Anvar P.V. and Arjun Panditrao, the courts have emphasized procedural adherence and expert evaluation to ensure the authenticity of electronic records.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *