✅ 6 Important Supreme Court Judgments on Electronic Evidence
◾ 1. NCT of Delhi v. Navjot Sandhu (2005) — Parliament Attack Case
- In this case, the Supreme Court held that even if the certificate under Section 65B(4) of the Evidence Act / 63 Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam is not produced, electronic records like call data can still be admitted as secondary evidence under Sections 63 and 65 IEA / 58 and 60 BSA.
- The Court said that printouts of call records taken from a computer or server, certified by a responsible officer of the service provider, can be given in evidence if the original servers cannot be produced in court.
- Thus, even without a Section 65B IEA / 63 BSA certificate, electronic evidence may be admitted through other provisions of the Evidence Act.
◾ 2. Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer & Ors. (2014)
- This case overruled Navjot Sandhu to an extent. The Supreme Court held that Section 65B IEA / 63 BSA is a complete code for proving electronic evidence.
- According to the Court, an electronic record can be admitted in evidence only if it complies with the conditions in Section 65B(4) IEA / 62 IEA — meaning, a proper certificate must accompany it. Without such a certificate, electronic records like CDs, printouts, or computer files are not admissible.
- The Court clarified that Sections 63 and 65 IEA / 58 and 60 BSA cannot be used to bypass Section 65B IEA / 63 BSA when it comes to electronic records.
◾ 3. Tomaso Bruno v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2015)
- In this case, the Supreme Court emphasized the importance of producing electronic evidence such as CCTV footage.
- The Court held that computer-generated evidence is admissible if it is proved as per Section 65B IEA / 63 BSA.
- The Court also stated that failure to produce the best available electronic evidence, such as CCTV footage, can lead to an adverse inference under Section 114(g) IEA / 119 BSA — meaning the Court can assume that the withheld evidence would have gone against the party suppressing it.
◾ 4. Shafhi Mohammad v. State of Himachal Pradesh (2018)
- The Supreme Court relaxed the strict rule laid down in Anvar’s case. It held that the requirement of a Section 65B IEA / 63 BSA certificate is not always mandatory.
- The Court said that Sections 65A and 65B IEA / 62 and 63 BSA are procedural and can be relaxed in the interest of justice. If a person does not have the device (for example, CCTV footage from someone else’s camera), they cannot be expected to produce the 65B IEA / 63 BSA certificate. In such cases, the Court can still allow the electronic evidence if its authenticity is proved.
- Hence, the Court treated the certificate requirement as directory, not mandatory, in special situations.
◾ 5. Shamsher Singh Verma v. State of Haryana (2016)
- In this case, the Supreme Court clarified that a compact disc (CD) is also considered a “document” under the Indian Evidence Act. Therefore, a CD, like other electronic records, can be used as evidence if it satisfies the conditions of admissibility under the law.
- This judgment helped confirm that electronic storage media such as CDs, DVDs, or pen drives fall within the definition of documents and can be used in court proceedings.
◾ 6. Kailash S/o Bajirao Pawar v. State of Maharashtra (2025)
- The Supreme Court held that a compact disc (CD) is an electronic record, and once the requirements of Section 65B IEA / 63 BSA are satisfied, the video becomes admissible like a document.
- The Court clarified that it is not necessary to prepare a transcript or have witnesses explain the video, as the court can itself view and interpret it.
- The Court further held that non-production of the Chemical Examiner or seized contraband is not fatal if reliable evidence like FSL reports and Section 52A NDPS Act documents exist. It observed that the High Court could have used Section 391 CrPC / 432 BNSS to take additional evidence instead of ordering re-trial.
- This judgment reinforces that once Section 65B IEA / 63 BSA is complied with, video evidence is fully admissible without the need for transcripts or repeated trials.