High Court affirms the need for strict compliance with Section 65-B of the Indian Evidence Act for admissibility of electronic records.
In a recent judgment, the Madhya Pradesh High Court at Gwalior, presided over by Justice Amit Seth, dismissed a petition challenging the trial court's decision to reject a CD as admissible evidence. The CD, submitted by the petitioners Mangilal and others in a civil suit against Nandkishore Sharma, was intended to support their claim over a disputed piece of land. However, the trial court refused to mark the CD as an exhibit, citing non-compliance with the statutory requirements for electronic evidence under Section 65-B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
The petitioners argued that the CD contained crucial video evidence recorded on Mangilal's mobile phone and subsequently transferred to a CD by Rahul Solanki, a videographer. They contended that the trial court erred in rejecting the CD as inadmissible, despite a certificate under Section 65-B being furnished. However, the trial court noted deficiencies in the certificate, which failed to meet the statutory criteria necessary for establishing the electronic record's authenticity and accuracy.
Justice Seth referred to the Supreme Court's landmark judgments in "Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer" and "Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal," which emphasize the mandatory nature of Section 65-B certificates for electronic records to be admissible as evidence. The High Court upheld the trial court's decision, emphasizing that electronic records are prone to tampering and require stringent compliance with the Evidence Act to ensure their reliability.
Furthermore, the High Court clarified that the trial court was within its rights to assess the admissibility of the CD before marking it as an exhibit. The petitioners' subsequent attempt to introduce the CD during another witness's testimony was also rejected due to the same deficiencies in the Section 65-B certificate.
The High Court's ruling reinforces the judiciary's commitment to maintaining the integrity of electronic evidence in legal proceedings. It underscores the importance of adhering to procedural requirements to prevent misuse or misrepresentation of digital records. The decision serves as a reminder that the courts will not overlook procedural lapses in the admissibility of electronic evidence, ensuring that justice is served based on credible and verifiable information.
Bottom line:-
Electronic evidence - Compliance with Section 65-B of the Indian Evidence Act is mandatory for the admissibility of electronic records; failure to fulfil the statutory requirements renders the electronic record inadmissible.
Statutory provision(s):
Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Sections 65-A and 65-B; Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 13, Rule 4; Order 14, Rule 1; Constitution of India, 1950, Article 227.
Mangilal v. Nandkishore Sharma, (Madhya Pradesh)(Gwalior) : Law Finder Doc id # 2931845
