Section 184 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, (BSA), 2023
Section 184 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA), 2023
The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (Indian Evidence Act, 2023) is a modernized version of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, which is intended to better reflect the advancements in technology, jurisprudence, and social needs. The Act is designed to address issues related to the admissibility of electronic records, the role of artificial intelligence (AI) in evidence handling, and the broader scope of modern-day practices in legal proceedings.
Section 184 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 pertains to the admissibility of electronic evidence and data records in judicial proceedings. It is an important section because it establishes a legal framework for the acceptance and use of electronic documents and records as evidence in courts of law, reinforcing the notion that modern forms of evidence are as credible as traditional paper-based documentation.
Text of Section 184 (BSA, 2023)
Section 184. Admissibility of Electronic Evidence
General Rule: In any proceedings under this Act, electronic records (including emails, text messages, digital files, and other forms of electronic communications or data) shall be admissible as evidence, provided that such electronic records are authentic, reliable, and relevant to the case in question.
Proof of Electronic Records:
The party seeking to introduce electronic records must produce evidence to establish that the records were created, stored, and maintained in the usual course of business or activity.
Authenticity of Electronic Records: Electronic records must be accompanied by an electronic certificate from an authorized person or entity, which verifies that the record has not been altered or tampered with since its creation.
Presumption of Integrity: When an electronic record is produced in accordance with the guidelines prescribed in this section, there is a presumption that it is an authentic record and has not been tampered with. This presumption may be rebutted by the opposing party.
Role of Digital Signatures and Encryption: In cases where digital signatures, encryption, or other authentication mechanisms are used to validate the integrity of electronic records, they shall be considered valid and binding in the court’s judgment, provided that such mechanisms comply with the legal standards specified under the Information Technology Act, 2000, and related regulations.
Exceptions:
Electronic records that have been tampered with, or those whose authenticity cannot be demonstrated, shall not be admissible in court.
The court may reject any electronic record if it finds that the document is not relevant, not credible, or violates the legal standards set forth for electronic evidence.
Cross-Examination of Electronic Records: Parties challenging the admissibility of an electronic record may request the cross-examination of any person who can testify to the creation, maintenance, and storage of the record, or who can authenticate the electronic certificate accompanying it.
Key Points and Interpretations of Section 184
Admissibility of Electronic Evidence:
Section 184 establishes that electronic evidence (e.g., emails, digital recordings, messages) is admissible in court, treating it on an equal footing with traditional physical records like documents, signatures, and paper-based contracts. This is important given the rise of digital communication and transactions in modern society.
Authentication and Certification:
The requirement for the authentication of electronic records through an electronic certificate or similar proof is crucial. It ensures that digital evidence cannot be tampered with or fabricated after the fact. This would typically involve electronic signatures and hash functions that ensure integrity.
Presumption of Integrity:
This provision ensures that once an electronic record is properly certified and introduced into the court, it is presumed to be authentic and reliable unless proven otherwise. This presumption can significantly streamline the judicial process in cases involving digital evidence.
Role of Digital Signatures:
Given the prominence of digital transactions, Section 184 specifically acknowledges the legal weight of digital signatures and encryption. These technologies play a key role in securing and verifying the authenticity of electronic records in the court of law.
Exceptions to Admissibility:
The section also establishes the possibility of rejection of electronic records that lack authenticity or are found to be tampered with. The court retains discretion to dismiss such evidence if there are credible concerns about its reliability.
Cross-Examination:
If one party challenges the admissibility of an electronic record, the court may allow cross-examination to probe the credibility and authenticity of the document. This ensures transparency and fairness in proceedings.
Practical Implications of Section 184
Digital Evidence in Criminal Cases:
In cases involving cybercrimes, fraud, or online harassment, electronic records like emails, texts, call records, and metadata can serve as crucial pieces of evidence. Section 184 helps ensure that these records can be used effectively in court.
Business and Commercial Disputes:
For businesses engaged in electronic contracts, emails, and transactions, Section 184 paves the way for these records to be accepted as evidence in disputes related to contracts, intellectual property, or corporate governance. Companies now have more flexibility in presenting digital evidence without the need for extensive paper-based documentation.
Consumer Protection:
In cases where digital contracts or transactions are in dispute, Section 184 allows consumers to use electronic evidence (like purchase records, communication with service providers, etc.) to substantiate their claims, offering a fairer mechanism for resolving such issues.
Privacy Concerns:
With the increasing reliance on digital evidence, concerns regarding privacy, data protection, and consent are crucial. Section 184 aligns with privacy laws and data protection regulations, requiring compliance with standards like the Information Technology Act, 2000 and GDPR to prevent misuse of personal or sensitive data in the courtroom.
Comparison with Previous Legislation
1. Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (Predecessor to BSA, 2023):
The original Indian Evidence Act did not specifically address electronic records, as it was drafted in a time before widespread digitalization. The provisions regarding evidence were based primarily on physical documents and verbal testimony.
The rise of the internet and digital communication necessitated amendments and updates to address the increasing role of digital technology in legal proceedings. This led to the introduction of laws like the Information Technology Act, 2000 and provisions for electronic evidence under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
2. Comparison with Other Jurisdictions:
Many other countries, such as the U.S. (Federal Rules of Evidence - Rule 902) and the U.K. (Civil Procedure Rules - Part 31), have also modernized their evidence laws to accommodate digital records. The BSA, 2023, aligns with these global standards by ensuring that electronic records, including emails, social media content, and encrypted messages, are treated as valid evidence in court proceedings.
Conclusion
Section 184 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA), 2023 represents a significant step in modernizing the legal system to incorporate electronic evidence into judicial proceedings. This section helps in ensuring the admissibility and credibility of digital records while providing clear standards for their authentication and integrity. It is essential for businesses, individuals, and legal professionals to be aware of these provisions to effectively navigate the evolving landscape of digital evidence in India.
As AI, digital communication, and blockchain technology continue to evolve, it is expected that the legal framework will also adapt, with provisions like Section 184 playing a pivotal role in shaping future legal norms related to digital and electronic evidence
RELATED Blog
comments