Instant messaging services such as WhatsApp have become the most important mode of communication during this digital age. This paper takes a detailed look into the admissibility of voice messages on WhatsApp as a piece of evidence under the Indian legal system. Drawing attention to the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 and the Information Technology Act, 2000, as amended, it attempts to look into the legal architecture governing electronic evidence. It takes the judicial precedents for studying the change of stance in Indian courts and mentions procedural requisites concerning electronic evidence in particular: Sections 60, 61, 62 and 63 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023. Besides mentioning some elementary procedures to ensure their admission before the court, it pays attention to technological hurdles and authentication issues of WhatsApp messages in particular voice recordings.
Introduction
With technology in its present state of rapid development, digital platforms have become the primary channels of communication. The most widely used messaging app is WhatsApp, through which one can not only send texts but also share other multimedia along with audio messages. The growing concerns over the usage of such voice messages as evidence in Indian courts are also becoming very specific. This article discusses the legal principles and the procedural requirements for admitting such evidence under Indian law, along with its implications for procedure.
Top digital platforms that you should know
Legal Framework Governing Electronic Evidence in India
1. Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam
The admissibility of electronic evidence in India is basically governed by the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023. Sections 60, 61, 62 and 63 introduced through the Information Technology Act, 2000 specifically deal with electronic records. These provisions stipulate that electronic evidence would be admissible in a court if it is accompanied by a certificate under Section 63, which talks about admissibility of electronic records.
Image by Bar & Bench
2. Information Technology Act
Information Technology Act 2000
The IT Act gives legal recognition to electronic records and digital signatures. Section 2(1)(t) of the Act defines “electronic record” very broadly, which includes data recorded or stored in any electronic device, such as WhatsApp voice messages. Section 4 further validates the legal recognition of electronic records if they satisfy prescribed technical conditions.
Admissibility of WhatsApp Voice Messages
1. Sections 60, 61, 62 and 63: Certification and Procedure
Certification of Electronic Records (Section 63)
Under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023: WhatsApp voice messages in electronic records become admissible as evidence when certified under Section 63. Certification would thereby ensure that the record is a genuine one, not even tampered with. The said certificate shall be issued by one who has responsibility for the running or management of the device employed for making the record. It should confirm that the electronic record was produced by a proper process and that it hadn’t been changed. Furthermore, relevant information, such as the specifications of the device, the methodology applied for generating the record, and system reliability used for data storage or retrieval, should be embedded in the certificate. This procedural protection guarantees that the electronic record is treated as primary evidence in court.
Certification to prove the electronic record can be admissible in courts as proof.
Handling of Devices and Metadata
The original device that contains the record must also be treated in a manner not to tamper with. The authenticity of the record is established from metadata, for example, timestamp and details of who sent and who received it. Such metadata must then be extracted accurately and stored. Once authenticated, the electronic record should be transferred securely to an external medium, such as a CD or USB, with a certificate proving that the process was procedurally sound. This way, evidence remains unchanged and can be presented in court, despite its digital format.
The Master Data of your information
Admissibility of Secondary Evidence (Section 60)
Secondary evidence in special circumstances may be permitted under the grounds of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam. The original document has been seized by a party who cannot be reached by the court, or for reasons such that it was damaged or lost beyond control of the party offering the evidence. Similarly, secondary representation of an original document is permitted if the former is of a nature that can’t be produced physically, or it is classified as a public document. These provisions do not allow procedural hurdles to deny the admission of relevant electronic evidence in court.
Electronic or digital record (Section 61)
Section 61 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam accords electronic records the same legal effect as physical documents. Neither can a court reject the acceptance of an electronic record with the argument that it is digital in nature. This recognition of electronic records ensures that modern methods of communication and documentation are seamlessly integrated into the legal process, with a robust framework for handling evidence in digital form.
Provisions for Computer Outputs (Section 63(1))
The treatment of computer-generated outputs, which are treated as documents if the requirements are met, is also addressed in the Adhiniyam. Information derived from a computer or other automatic information processing equipment or communication device will be treated as a document if the Act’s requirements are met even though it is stored, recorded, or copied in optical, magnetic, or semiconductor memory. Acceptance of reliable duplicates of electronic records as equivalent to the original serves to simplify presentation of electronic records.
Electronic Evidence admissibility in Court
Importance of Compliance
Admissibility of electronic evidence is further conditioned on the adherence to procedure prescribed under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam so that even digital electronic records become prima facie evidence. The BSA provides for these processes, thus making evidence acceptable only when the process requirements are adhered to by it. Electronic records pertaining to WhatsApp messages may thereby be preserved with authenticity and credibility if the BSA guidelines followed.
2. Judicial Precedents
Several landmark judgments provide guidance on the admissibility of electronic evidence:
1. Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer (2014):
HELD: In this landmark decision, the Supreme Court of India laid down a landmark judgment for making it crystal clear about all the requirements that needed to be fulfilled before allowing admission of electronic evidence into litigations. It decided that an electronic record would be admitted only with a certificate issued under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. This certificate becomes primary evidence of the electronic record as authentic and of proven integrity and is considered compulsory to establish its evidential value.
It overturned all previous decisions that allowed the production of oral evidence or any other form of secondary evidence to prove the genuineness of electronic records. The Court held that the safeguards incorporated in Section 65B are of an obligatory nature because they assure the production of the electronic record as a true copy from the authentic source without any alteration. This decision highlighted the need to strictly adhere to the statutory provisions in dealing with electronic evidence, given the changing role of technology in legal processes and the value of maintaining the integrity of digital evidence in a judicial context.
2. Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal (2020):
HELD: The Supreme Court of India in reiterating the seminal principle that a Section 65B certificate is crucial to electronic evidence admissibility elaborated further on its ambit and applicability. It also explained that the production of the said certificate is mandatory on every instance when an electronic record is used as an evidence, except on circumstances wherein the original device can be produced before the court so that the authenticity of the electronic record can be personally verified without the requirement of a certificate.
The judgment further gave great elaboration on the procedural detail in obtaining and submitting the certificate. It stipulated that the individual who created or maintains the electronic record must issue the certificate while ascertaining that the record is a true and correct reproduction of the original data. That was to eliminate all ambiguities of the certification process and confirm that a Section 65B requirement continues to be essential to the validity and integrity of electronic evidence.
These precedents imply that WhatsApp voice messages, like other forms of electronic evidence, must meet these statutory requirements to be accepted in court.
Challenges in Admitting WhatsApp Voice Messages
1. Authenticity and Tampering Concerns
The Authenticity can be raised on the basis of being edited or tampered with WhatsApp voice messages. Modern technology has made it possible to edit voice recordings, hence, their authenticity as evidence can be questioned.
2. Metadata and Forensic Examination
Metadata, such as time and sender details, become very crucial in establishing the source and authenticity of the WhatsApp voice message. In most courts, it is often relied upon forensic experts who analyze this metadata as they inspect its integrity.
Certified experts conducting examination of electronic records to avoid tampering of evidence.
3. Chain of Custody
The chain of custody needs to be made very clear to avoid accusation of tampering or fabrication in evidence. Any gap when it comes to documenting the electronic record storage and handling can contribute to the rejection of electronic evidence.
Practical Considerations for Admissibility
1. Collecting and Preserving Evidence
The voice messages captured should be in their original format, and these parties should ensure they are well stored. There must be the maintaining of screenshots, metadata accompanying the screenshots, and device details to prove authenticity.
2. Obtaining the Section 63 Certificate
The certificate must be prepared by a competent person who has access to the device on which the WhatsApp message was recorded or stored. This certificate should outline the procedure for retrieval and reproduction of the message.
3. Relying on Expert Testimony
Forensic specialists are essential in confirming the integrity of WhatsApp voice communications in circumstances where there are disagreements regarding their legitimacy. To settle such disputes, courts have the authority to order expert examination.
Comparative Perspective
In the United States and the United Kingdom, electronic evidence, including WhatsApp messages and voice recordings, will be admitted in court based on relevance and reliability of the evidence. Here, the courts will determine whether electronic evidence, such as WhatsApp messages, is lawfully obtained, in its original form, and accurately reflects the facts of the case. For example, for instance, in the United States, Federal Rules of Evidence demands the offering party to prove that authenticity by testimony, metadata, or technical validation that evidences the matter’s acceptability in court as reliable. Similarly, in the United Kingdom, the Civil Procedure Rules and the Police and Criminal Evidence Act have provided that digital evidence must be preserved and presented to the court without alteration so that it is admissible according to the requisite standard of authenticity and relevance. The Indian courts are slowly developing in consonance with international practices. They stress compliance with the procedures and technical accuracy.
Implications for Legal Practice
WhatsApp voice messages are admissible. That itself makes the growing importance of equipping lawyers with proper electronic evidence management and presentation techniques pertinent. As litigations involving courts increasingly go digital with means of communication, lawyers would have to ensure that those records of electronic communication are relevant as well as meet with stringent procedural requirements for them to be admitted. Those include authenticating the record to prove it is genuine and free from any alterations. Section 63 certificates form the basis on which the admissibility of electronic evidence is granted under Indian law. These have to be prepared with much care, detailing the process by which the evidence was retrieved, preserved, and reproduced.
Legal practitioners should keep themselves updated on the latest developments in digital forensics to validate metadata, timestamps, among other technical features of electronic records. This would help them ascertain the credibility of WhatsApp voice messages and similar digital evidence in a court of law. Hence, by ensuring procedural adequacy and technical correctness of the process, lawyers strengthen their case but also strengthen the legitimacy and honesty of the judicial process fast becoming controlled and dominated by electronic communication.
Conclusion
In Conclusion WhatsApp voice messages are not admissible in Indian courts unless they comply strictly with the procedural requirements mentioned under Sections 60, 61, 62, and 63 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam.
Although these messages are being increasingly used as evidence, the authenticity and compliance issues with procedures are grave. With best practices and using forensic knowledge, litigants can ensure the acceptability of WhatsApp voice communications in court. To make justice possible in the digital age, a court has to find a balance between procedural protection and pragmatism as technologies advance.