Section 132 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, (BSA), 2023
Overview
Section 132 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA) deals with evidence relating to electronic records and digital signatures, specifically focusing on presumptions about digital signatures in electronic records. This section builds upon the principles in the Information Technology Act, 2000 and codifies them within the framework of the Indian Evidence Act to provide clarity on the admissibility and presumption of authenticity of electronically signed records.
The section is particularly important because in the digital era, a lot of transactions, contracts, and official communications are executed electronically, often authenticated via digital signatures. Section 132 provides a legal mechanism to presume the authenticity and integrity of such electronically signed documents unless proven otherwise.
Text of Section 132 (Paraphrased)
Section 132: Presumption as to Digital Signature in Electronic Records
If an electronic record purports to be signed with a digital signature of a person, the court shall presume, until contrary is proved, that:
a) The digital signature belongs to the person to whom it is linked.
b) The digital signature was affixed with the authorization of that person.The presumption under this section is rebuttable, meaning the opposing party can present evidence to show that the digital signature is not genuine or was affixed without proper authorization.
Explanation of Section 132
1. Digital Signature and Authentication:
A digital signature is a cryptographic mechanism used to verify the authenticity and integrity of electronic records.
Section 132 gives legal recognition to digital signatures, equating them with traditional handwritten signatures in terms of proof and presumption of authenticity.
2. Presumption of Authenticity:
Once a document has a digital signature, the law presumes it is genuine and that the person whose signature is affixed authorized it.
This presumption is “rebuttable”, meaning if the authenticity is challenged, the party seeking to disprove it must provide evidence that the signature was forged, tampered with, or unauthorized.
3. Legal Significance:
Section 132 reduces the burden of proof for parties relying on electronically signed documents.
It facilitates smoother admissibility of electronic records in civil, criminal, and commercial proceedings.
4. Connection to the IT Act:
This section aligns with Sections 5, 35, and 85A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, which deal with digital signatures, their use, and presumption of authenticity in electronic records.
Case Law Relevant to Section 132
While Section 132 is a recent enactment, its principles can be understood through precedents dealing with digital signatures and electronic evidence under the IT Act and Evidence Act provisions.
1. Tata Consultancy Services v. State of Andhra Pradesh (2004)
Facts: The case dealt with electronic records and digital signatures used in government tenders.
Ruling: The court recognized that digitally signed records are admissible and can be relied upon as evidence of authenticity under the IT Act.
Relevance to Section 132: Confirms the principle that digital signatures are legally valid and presumptively genuine.
2. Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer (2014)
Facts: The case involved the admissibility of electronic records as evidence. The main issue was whether digital records without proper certification could be admitted.
Ruling: The Supreme Court held that electronic records must have proper certification under Section 65B of the Evidence Act to be admissible.
Relevance to Section 132: Highlights the importance of authenticity for electronic records. Section 132 now provides a legal presumption for digital signatures, simplifying this process.
3. State of Tamil Nadu v. Suhas Katti (2004)
Facts: This criminal case involved the use of emails (electronically signed) as evidence of harassment.
Ruling: Emails with digital signatures were treated as admissible evidence provided their authenticity could be reasonably proven.
Relevance to Section 132: Reinforces that electronically signed records are presumed authentic unless rebutted, echoing the new statutory presumption in Section 132.
Key Points to Remember
Digital Signature Presumption: Section 132 presumes that a digital signature on an electronic record belongs to the stated person and was affixed with authorization.
Rebuttable Presumption: The presumption is not absolute; the opposing party can challenge the validity.
Legal Recognition: Aligns Indian law with modern digital transaction practices.
Evidence Efficiency: Reduces the burden of proving authenticity in courts for electronically signed documents.
Conclusion
Section 132 of the BSA 2023 is a significant step in adapting evidence law to the digital era, providing a rebuttable presumption of authenticity for digital signatures. It ensures that electronically signed records are recognized as legally valid evidence while allowing challenges in cases of tampering or forgery. This section complements the framework of the IT Act, making electronic records more reliable and enforceable in both civil and criminal courts.
RELATED Blog
comments