VoxJuris
Home › Acts › Evidence Act › Chapter V › Section 65B

Indian Evidence Act, 1872 · Chapter V: Of Documentary Evidence

Section 65B: Admissibility of electronic records

The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 was repealed and replaced by the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 from 1 July 2024. It still applies to offences and proceedings from before that date.

Now in the BSA section 63 (Admissibility of electronic records)

In plain words

Information in an electronic record that is printed, stored or copied by a computer (computer output) is treated as a document and is admissible without the original, if certain conditions are met.

  • The output was produced while the computer was regularly used for activities carried on by the person lawfully controlling it, with such information regularly fed in during those activities.
  • The computer was operating properly during the relevant period, or any malfunction did not affect the record's accuracy, and the information reproduces what was fed in.
  • Several computers used together or in succession are treated as a single computer.
  • A certificate identifying the record, describing how it was produced and the device, and dealing with these conditions, signed by a responsible official, is evidence of what it states.
  • The Supreme Court has held that this certificate is a mandatory condition for admitting electronic records as secondary evidence.

A simplified explanation, prepared with AI assistance from the official text below and checked automatically against it for numbers and cross-references. The official text is the law and prevails over this summary. Not legal advice.

Read the in-depth explanation, with key Supreme Court rulings ↓

Official text

(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, any information contained in an electronic record which is printed on a paper, stored, recorded or copied in optical or magnetic media produced by a computer (hereinafter referred to as the computer output) shall be deemed to be also a document, if the conditions mentioned in this section are satisfied in relation to the information and computer in question and shall be admissible in any proceedings, without further proof or production of the original, as evidence or any contents of the original or of any fact stated therein of which direct evidence would be admissible.

(2) The conditions referred to in sub-section (1) in respect of a computer output shall be the following, namely:––

(a) the computer output containing the information was produced by the computer during the period over which the computer was used regularly to store or process information for the purposes of any activities regularly carried on over that period by the person having lawful control over the use of the computer;

(b) during the said period, information of the kind contained in the electronic record or of the kind from which the information so contained is derived was regularly fed into the computer in the ordinary course of the said activities;

(c) throughout the material part of the said period, the computer was operating properly or, if not, then in respect of any period in which it was not operating properly or was out of operation during that part of the period, was not such as to affect the electronic record or the accuracy of its contents; and

(d) the information contained in the electronic record reproduces or is derived from such information fed into the computer in the ordinary course of the said activities.

(3) Where over any period, the function of storing or processing information for the purposes of any activities regularly carried on over that period as mentioned in clause (a) of sub-section (2) was regularly performed by computers, whether––

(a) by a combination of computers operating over that period; or 1. Subs. by Act 3 of 1951, s. 3 and the Schedule, for “the States” (w.e.f. 1-4-1951). 2. Cf. has Bankers’ Books Evidence Act, 1891 (18 of 1891), s. 4. 3. Subs. by Act 21 of 2000, s. 92 and the Second Schedule (w.e.f. 17-10-2000).

(b) by different computers operating in succession over that period; or

(c) by different combinations of computers operating in succession over that period; or

(d) in any other manner involving the successive operation over that period, in whatever order, of one or more computers and one or more combinations of computers, all the computers used for that purpose during that period shall be treated for the purposes of this section as constituting a single computer; and references in this section to a computer shall be construed accordingly.

(4) In any proceedings where it is desired to give a statement in evidence by virtue of this section, a certificate doing any of the following things, that is to say,––

(a) identifying the electronic record containing the statement and describing the manner in which it was produced;

(b) giving such particulars of any device involved in the production of that electronic record as may be appropriate for the purpose of showing that the electronic record was produced by a computer;

(c) dealing with any of the matters to which the conditions mentioned in sub-section (2) relate, and purporting to be signed by a person occupying a responsible official position in relation to the operation of the relevant device or the management of the relevant activities (whichever is appropriate) shall be evidence of any matter stated in the certificate; and for the purposes of this sub-section it shall be sufficient for a matter to be stated to the best of the knowledge and belief of the person stating it.

(5) For the purposes of this section,––

(a) information shall be taken to be supplied to a computer if it is supplied thereto in any appropriate form and whether it is so supplied directly or (with or without human intervention) by means of any appropriate equipment;

(b) whether in the course of activities carried on by any official, information is supplied with a view to its being stored or processed for the purposes of those activities by a computer operated otherwise than in the course of those activities, that information, if duly supplied to that computer, shall be taken to be supplied to it in the course of those activities;

(c) a computer output shall be taken to have been produced by a computer whether it was produced by it directly or (with or without human intervention) by means of any appropriate equipment.

Explanation.––For the purposes of this section any reference to information being derived from other information shall be a reference to its being derived therefrom by calculation, comparison or any other process.]

Corresponding sections were matched by comparing the wording of both official texts, and for the IPC and BNS, also against a published correspondence table. Wording, punishments and structure often changed, so read both sections before relying on the match.

Source: India Code (Legislative Department), the text of the Act as it stood before its repeal. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here.

Understanding this section

Section 65B governs how electronic records, such as emails, CCTV footage, call records, CDs and WhatsApp messages, are admitted in evidence. A computer output is treated as a document if certain conditions are met, and the key procedural requirement is a certificate under sub-section (4).

A complete code

Sections 65A and 65B form a complete code for electronic evidence. The general rules on secondary evidence in sections 63 and 65 cannot be used to get around them.

The certificate

Where a copy (computer output) of an electronic record is produced, a certificate under section 65B(4) is a condition of admissibility. It must identify the record, describe how it was produced, give particulars of the device, deal with the conditions in sub-section (2), and be signed by a person in a responsible position in relation to the device or activity. Oral evidence cannot replace it.

When no certificate is needed

If the original device itself is produced, for example the phone or laptop on which the record was first stored, and its owner proves it in the witness box, no certificate is required. The certificate is needed for copies.

Timing and difficulty in obtaining

The certificate should ideally be produced with the record, but it can be produced later during trial, so long as the accused is not prejudiced. Where a party has done everything possible to get it from an authority that refuses, the court may relieve him of the requirement.

Settling the conflict

A two judge bench had held in 2018 that the certificate was not always mandatory. A three judge bench overruled that in 2020, restoring the earlier position that the certificate is a necessary condition for admitting copies of electronic records.

Key Supreme Court rulings

  • Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal 2020 INSC 453

    Sections 65A and 65B are a complete code; a written certificate under section 65B(4) is a sine qua non for admitting electronic records and oral evidence cannot replace it; no certificate is needed when the original document is produced; Anvar P.V. is the law, and Shafhi Mohammad was overruled.

  • Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer 2014 INSC 645

    An electronic record by way of secondary evidence is not admissible unless the requirements of section 65B are satisfied; CDs produced without the certificate were inadmissible.

Common mistakes

  • Producing printouts or copies without a section 65B(4) certificate.
  • Relying on Shafhi Mohammad, which was overruled.
  • Insisting on a certificate when the original device is produced.

Read with: Section 65A Evidence Act, Section 63 Evidence Act, Section 63 BSA

Prepared with AI assistance as a study aid. Every ruling listed was checked against the Supreme Court's own judgments on this site, and quoted words appear in those judgments; linked names open the full judgment. Read the judgments themselves before relying on them. Not legal advice.

Supreme Court judgments citing the section 65B