Campus Journalist 
ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE
-By Shruthika
Evidence generated through digital devices in the form of media, calls and email can be treated as promissory made between two or more individuals.
The concept of “electronic evidence” has been introduced through the Information Technology Act, 2000 (“IT Act”) and the related amendments in the Evidence Act, 1872 (“Evidence Act”) and the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (“IPC”). The IT Act and its amendment are based on the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (“UNCITRAL”) model Law on Electronic Commerce. Evidence have involved into a fundamental pillar of communication, processing and documentation. The government agencies are opening up to introduce various governance policies electronically and periodical filings to regulate and control the industries are done through electronic means. These various forms of Electronic Evidence/ Digital Evidence are increasingly being used in the judicial proceedings.
The Section 65B of the Evidence Act makes the secondary copy in the form of computer output comprising of printout or the data copied on electronic/magnetic media admissible. It provides section 65B – Admissibility of Electronic Records. In February 2019, the European Commission recommended “engaging in two international negotiations on cross-border rules to obtain electronic evidence,” one involving the USA and one at the Coe. Indeed, the USA/EU axis and the CoE are the scenes of work on these issues, as described and compared in a 2019 paper advocating a revamping of the Mutual legal assistance treaty, page 17.
The reason for the above development was given as due to the fact that in the offline world, authorities can request and obtain documents necessary to investigate a crime within their own country, but electronic evidence is stored online by service providers often based in a different country than [sic] the investigator, even if the crime is only in one country.” The Commission then gave data supporting this decision. Indeed, this is the reason for treating electronic evidence differently from the ways that other evidence is treated. Moreover, it may expedite convergence or some form of reconciliation between the world’s two main legal systems, i.e., common law and civil law, at least as regards this use case.
The proposition is clear and explicit that if the secondary electronic evidence is without a certificate u/s 65B of Evidence Act, it is not admissible and any opinion of the forensic expert and the deposition of the witness in the court of law cannot be looked into by the court.
