Why this certificate matters
From Section 65B to Section 63 BSA
Courts will not accept a copy of digital evidence without a proper certificate. Here is how that rule came about, in plain words.
17 October 2000
Information Technology Act adds Section 65B to the Evidence Act
Act 21 of 2000
Printouts and copies of electronic records become admissible as documents, if the conditions in s.65B are met. Section 65B(4) provides for a certificate that identifies the record, describes how it was produced and gives details of the device.
2014
Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer
(2014) 10 SCC 473
A three-judge bench holds that a copy of an electronic record (a CD, a printout, a pen-drive copy) cannot be admitted as evidence unless the s.65B(4) certificate is produced with it.
2018
Shafhi Mohammad v. State of Himachal Pradesh
(2018) 2 SCC 801
A two-judge bench says the certificate is a procedural requirement that can be relaxed, for example when the party producing the record does not have the device it came from.
14 July 2020
Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal
(2020) 7 SCC 1
A three-judge bench settles the law. The certificate is a condition precedent: a copy of an electronic record is not admissible without it. Shafhi Mohammad is overruled. No certificate is needed only when the original device itself is produced and proved in court. If the certificate is missing, the court can allow or order it to be filed while the trial is still going on.
1 July 2024
Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 — Section 63
Act 47 of 2023
The BSA replaces the Indian Evidence Act. Section 63 carries forward the certificate rule from s.65B and requires the certificate in the format given in the Schedule: Part A signed by the party in charge of the device, Part B signed by an expert, and the hash value of each record. A certificate is needed every time the record is submitted.
22 May 2026
Pune Bar Association v. Union of India
Supreme Court, three-judge bench
The Supreme Court rejects a challenge to s.63(4) and the Schedule. It describes the hash value as an electronic fingerprint and the expert’s Part B as an extra layer of assurance. Part B is not limited to examiners notified under s.79A of the IT Act: a person with real expertise in computer science or cyber forensics may sign it, if the court is satisfied of that expertise.
What this means for you
- Filing a screenshot, printout, chat export, recording or pen-drive copy? Attach a Section 63 certificate.
- Use the exact format in the Schedule: Part A by you (the person in charge of the device) and Part B by an expert.
- State the hash value of each file. It proves the copy has not been changed.
- File a fresh certificate each time the record is submitted.
- A certificate is not needed if you produce the original device itself in court. Ask your lawyer which applies.
Section 63 in short
Plain-language summaries. The Act’s own words follow.
- s.63(1)
- Computer output (printouts, copies, exports) is treated as a document and is admissible without producing the original, if the conditions in this section are met.
- s.63(2)
- Four conditions: the device was used regularly by the person in lawful control; the information was regularly fed in; the device worked properly (or any fault did not affect the record); and the record reproduces information fed in the ordinary course.
- s.63(3)
- Several devices used for the purpose (standalone, a computer system, a network, a computer resource or an intermediary) are treated as one device.
- s.63(4)
- A certificate in the Schedule format, signed by the person in charge and by an expert, must accompany the record every time it is submitted.
- s.63(5)
- Information supplied or output produced with or without human intervention counts.
Section 63(4), word for word
(4) In any proceeding where it is desired to give a statement in evidence by virtue of this section, a certificate doing any of the following things shall be submitted along with the electronic record at each instance where it is being submitted for admission, namely:— (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 or a communication device referred to in clauses (a) to (e) of sub-section (3); (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 in charge of the computer or communication device or the management of the relevant activities (whichever is appropriate) and an expert 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 in the certificate specified in the Schedule.