SupremeToday Landscape Ad
AI Thinking

AI Thinking...

Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!

Scanned Judgements…!


AI Overview

AI Overview...

  • Section 65B Certificate - The certificate under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act is required to authenticate electronic records as evidence. It must be issued by a responsible official involved in the operation or management of the electronic record. This certificate is a mandatory prerequisite for admitting electronic evidence in court proceedings ["2023 7 Supreme 351"], ["2022 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 42841"], ["

    DHRUBEN GURALDAS BALANI vs STATE OF GUJARAT - Gujarat

    "], ["2022 0 Supreme(Guj) 5"].
  • Purpose and Legal Requirement - The certificate under Section 65B(4) specifically confirms the authenticity of electronic records, including copies or secondary evidence. The Supreme Court has clarified that this certificate is a condition precedent for admissibility, unless the original electronic document is produced ["2022 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 42841"], ["2022 0 Supreme(Guj) 5"], recent Supreme Court judgment.

  • Admissibility of Electronic Evidence - Courts have emphasized that without the proper certificate under Section 65B(4), electronic evidence cannot be admitted, regardless of its contents or the report from forensic labs. The certificate must be signed by a responsible person and produced at the time of marking the document ["

    DHRUBEN GURALDAS BALANI vs STATE OF GUJARAT - Gujarat

    "].
  • Who Can Give the Certificate - The certificate must be issued by a person occupying a responsible official position related to the electronic record, such as an officer or authority involved in handling or managing the electronic data. The court may verify the authority of the certifying person before accepting the certificate ["2022 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 42841"], ["2022 0 Supreme(Guj) 5"].

  • Voice Samples and Privacy Rights - Orders to give voice samples are not considered to infringe upon the right to privacy under Article 20(3) of the Constitution, as upheld by the Supreme Court in Ritesh Sinha case. Voice samples are used solely for comparison and are not testimonial evidence ["2022 0 Supreme(P&H) 1426"], ["2022 0 Supreme(P&H) 508"], ["2022 0 Supreme(P&H) 485"].

Analysis and Conclusion

The certification under Section 65B(4) of the Indian Evidence Act is mandatory for the admissibility of electronic records in court. The certificate must be issued by a responsible official involved with the electronic data. Orders to produce voice samples do not violate constitutional rights, as they serve a forensic purpose and are not testimonial in nature. Therefore, only qualified and authorized persons can issue the Section 65B certificate, and its absence can lead to the rejection of electronic evidence.


References:- 2023 7 Supreme 351-

DHANANJAY BALASAHEB KANAKDANDE vs SOW. SARITA DHANANJAY KANAKDANDE AND OTHERS

- 2022 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 42841-

DHRUBEN GURALDAS BALANI vs STATE OF GUJARAT - Gujarat

- 2022 0 Supreme(Guj) 5- 2022 0 Supreme(P&H) 1426- 2022 0 Supreme(P&H) 508- 2022 0 Supreme(P&H) 485
Who Can Issue a Section 65B Certificate under the Indian Evidence Act for Electronic Evidence?

Who Can Issue a Section 65B Certificate in India?

In today's digital age, electronic evidence such as emails, CCTV footage, and WhatsApp messages plays a pivotal role in legal proceedings. However, for these records to be admissible in Indian courts, they often require a mandatory certificate under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. A common question arises: Who can give 65B certificate? This blog post breaks down the legal requirements, judicial interpretations, and practical considerations to help you understand this crucial aspect of evidence law.

Note: This article provides general information based on legal precedents and is not a substitute for professional legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for case-specific guidance.

Understanding Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act

Section 65B addresses the admissibility of electronic records. It stipulates that a copy of an electronic record is admissible in evidence if accompanied by a certificate that authenticates its accuracy and the device's operation. The certificate must confirm that the electronic record was produced by a computer or device operated properly, without tampering, and identify the device used. 2023 0 Supreme(Ker) 32

The key provision in Section 65B(4) requires this certificate to be signed by a person occupying a responsible official position in relation to the operation of the relevant device or system. But who exactly qualifies? Let's explore.

Who is Authorized to Issue the Section 65B Certificate?

Responsible Official Position: The Core Requirement

The certificate can be given by a person who occupies a responsible official position related to the operation or management of the electronic device or system that generated or stored the record. Importantly, this person need not be the owner of the device. What matters is their sufficient control, knowledge, and responsibility over the device and the process of generating or maintaining the electronic record. 2013 0 Supreme(Del) 868 2023 0 Supreme(Ker) 32

Examples include:- System administrators or IT managers overseeing the server or computer.- Officers responsible for maintenance of CCTV systems in banks or offices.- Custodians of data, such as nodal officers in government departments or telecom providers. 2023 0 Supreme(Ker) 32 2024 0 Supreme(Guj) 463

The certifier must:- Sign the certificate.- Describe the manner of production of the electronic record.- Identify the device or system used.- Address the conditions under Section 65B(2), ensuring the device was functioning properly. 2023 0 Supreme(Ker) 32 2024 0 Supreme(Guj) 463

Not Limited to Owners

Judicial rulings emphasize that ownership is irrelevant. The focus is on control and responsibility. For instance, in cases involving CCTV footage from ATMs or branches, the branch manager or IT head can issue it, even if the bank owns the system. 2023 0 Supreme(Ker) 32 2024 0 Supreme(Guj) 463

Judicial Clarifications on Section 65B Certificate Issuers

The Supreme Court has provided landmark guidance, particularly in Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal (2020) (MANU/SC/0521/2020). The court clarified: the certificate can be issued by any person occupying a responsible official position in relation to the operation of the relevant device or activities. 2023 0 Supreme(Ker) 32 2013 0 Supreme(Del) 868

Key holdings from this case include:- The certificate is mandatory for secondary electronic evidence but unnecessary if the original document is produced. 2022 0 Supreme(Guj) 549- Courts can summon the responsible person if they refuse or fail to provide the certificate: An application can always be made to a Judge for production of such a certificate from the requisite person under Section 65B(4) in cases in which such person refuses to give it. 2022 0 Supreme(P&H) 1006 2020 4 Supreme 405- It can be produced at any stage of the proceedings, not just initially. 2013 0 Supreme(Del) 868 2023 0 Supreme(Ker) 32

In Shafhi Mohammad v. State of Himachal Pradesh (overruled in part), the court initially suggested limitations, but Arjun Panditrao overruled this, affirming that parties can seek court directions to obtain the certificate from third parties. 2020 4 Supreme 405

Lower courts have echoed this. For example, in a Karnataka High Court case, the trial court was directed to allow recall of a witness to produce the 65B certificate at the marking stage.

SHREYAS S Vs RAVIKUMAR S N

Exceptions and Practical Considerations

While the certificate is generally required, exceptions apply:- Original electronic records: No certificate needed if the primary evidence (e.g., original video cassette) is produced. Compliance with Section 65B(4) of the Indian Evidence Act is unnecessary if the original document itself is produced. 2022 0 Supreme(Guj) 549- Refusal by responsible person: Courts may summon them or admit evidence after assessing efforts made. 2013 0 Supreme(Del) 868 2022 0 Supreme(P&H) 1006- Unavailability: The maxim lex non cogit ad impossibilia (law does not compel the impossible) may apply if all reasonable steps are taken. 2020 4 Supreme 405

In a revision petition involving ATM CCTV without the certificate, the court acquitted the accused, underscoring the certificate's importance: the footage was inadmissible absent compliance. 2022 0 Supreme(P&H) 1006

However, in cases like bank disciplinary proceedings, courts have considered electronic evidence contextually, even if certificates are imperfect, provided disability or other proofs suggest authenticity. 2017 0 Supreme(P&H) 2212

Recommendations for Litigants and Courts

To ensure smooth admissibility:- Identify the right person early: Approach IT heads, custodians, or managers with device control.- Request via court if needed: File applications under Section 91 CrPC or Section 311 CrPC for summons.- Prepare comprehensive certificates: Include device details, operation logs, and tamper-proof statements.- Courts: Exercise discretion to avoid prejudice, balancing prosecution and defense rights. 2020 4 Supreme 405

Key Takeaways

Understanding who can issue a 65B certificate is vital for leveraging digital evidence effectively. Stay updated on evolving jurisprudence, as technology and case law continue to shape this area.

References:1. 2013 0 Supreme(Del) 868: Responsible official position for device operation.2. 2023 0 Supreme(Ker) 32: Not limited to owners; judicial support.3. 2024 0 Supreme(Guj) 463: Signing, description, and court summons.4. 2022 0 Supreme(Guj) 549, 2022 0 Supreme(P&H) 1006, 2020 4 Supreme 405: Exceptions and summons provisions.

#Section65B #ElectronicEvidence #IndianEvidenceAct
Chat Download
Chat Print
Chat R ALL
Landmark
Strategy
Argument
Risk
Chat Voice Bottom Icon
Chat Sent Bottom Icon
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top