Section 63 BSA: Admissibility of Electronic Records

Section 63 BSA explains the admissibility of electronic evidence, mandatory certificate requirements, conditions for computer outputs and important Supreme Court judgments.

Introduction

Section 63 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA) governs the admissibility of electronic records produced as computer outputs. It is one of the most significant provisions for proving digital evidence in Indian courts.

The provision covers electronic information printed on paper, stored on optical or magnetic media, held in semiconductor memory, or otherwise recorded or copied in electronic form. Examples include email printouts, WhatsApp chat exports, CCTV footage, call-detail records, digital photographs and computer-generated reports.

Section 63 prescribes conditions relating to the regular use of the computer or communication device, the ordinary-course supply of information, the proper functioning of the system and the accuracy of the resulting record. Subsection (4) also prescribes a certificate to accompany the electronic record when it is tendered for admission under the section.

The essential principle is that electronic evidence must satisfy the applicable statutory conditions for admissibility. A screenshot, printout or exported file is not automatically admissible merely because it exists in digital form.

Bare Act: Section 63 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023

63. Admissibility of electronic records.—

(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Adhiniyam, any information contained in an electronic record which is printed on paper, stored, recorded or copied in optical or magnetic media or semiconductor memory which is produced by a computer or any communication device or otherwise stored, recorded or copied in any electronic form (hereinafter referred to as the computer output) shall be deemed to be also a document, if the conditions mentioned in this section are satisfied in relation to the information and computer in question and shall be admissible in any proceedings, without further proof or production of the original, as evidence or any contents of the original or of any fact stated therein of which direct evidence would be admissible.

(2) The conditions referred to in sub-section (1) in respect of a computer output shall be the following, namely:—

(a) the computer output containing the information was produced by the computer or communication device during the period over which the computer or communication device was used regularly to create, store or process information for the purposes of any activity regularly carried on over that period by the person having lawful control over the use of the computer or communication device;

(b) during the said period, information of the kind contained in the electronic record or of the kind from which the information so contained is derived was regularly fed into the computer or communication device in the ordinary course of the said activities;

(c) throughout the material part of the said period, the computer or communication device was operating properly or, if not, then in respect of any period in which it was not operating properly or was out of operation during that part of the period, was not such as to affect the electronic record or the accuracy of its contents; and

(d) the information contained in the electronic record reproduces or is derived from such information fed into the computer or communication device in the ordinary course of the said activities.

(3) Where over any period, the function of creating, storing or processing information for the purposes of any activity regularly carried on over that period as mentioned in clause (a) of sub-section (2) was regularly performed by means of one or more computers or communication device, whether—

(a) in standalone mode; or

(b) on a computer system; or

(c) on a computer network; or

(d) on a computer resource enabling information creation or providing information processing and storage; or

(e) through an intermediary,

all the computers or communication devices used for that purpose during that period shall be treated for the purposes of this section as constituting a single computer or communication device; and references in this section to a computer or communication device shall be construed accordingly.

(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.

(5) For the purposes of this section,—

(a) information shall be taken to be supplied to a computer or communication device if it is supplied thereto in any appropriate form and whether it is so supplied directly or (with or without human intervention) by means of any appropriate equipment;

(b) a computer output shall be taken to have been produced by a computer or communication device whether it was produced by it directly or (with or without human intervention) by means of any appropriate equipment or by other electronic means as referred to in clauses (a) to (e) of sub-section (3).

Meaning of Section 63 BSA

Section 63 establishes the statutory framework under which specified electronic records and computer outputs may be admitted as evidence.

A computer output may be treated as a document and admitted without further proof or production of the original when the conditions prescribed by the section are satisfied. These conditions help establish the reliability of the process through which the electronic information was generated, stored or reproduced.

For example, a business may produce a computer-generated transaction report to prove that a payment was processed. The party relying on the report must consider the conditions in Section 63 and the certificate requirements in subsection (4).

The provision is not limited to computers in the narrow sense. Subsection (3) addresses systems involving multiple computers, networks, computer resources and intermediaries. This is particularly relevant to cloud-based records, online platforms and systems in which information passes through several connected devices.

Section 63 must be read with Sections 61 and 62 BSA. Section 61 recognises electronic and digital records, while Section 62 directs that their contents may be proved in accordance with Section 63.

Essential Conditions for Admissibility Under Section 63(2)

1. Regular use of the computer or communication device

Under Section 63(2)(a), the computer output must have been produced during a period in which the computer or communication device was regularly used to create, store or process information for an activity regularly carried on by a person having lawful control over its use.

Example: A bank regularly uses its computer system to maintain customer transactions. A transaction report generated from that system may satisfy this condition if the relevant statutory requirements are established.

The provision focuses on regular use and lawful control over the system, rather than treating every device-generated record as automatically reliable.

Also Read: Section 81 BSA: Presumption as to Gazettes in Electronic or Digital Record

2. Information must have been regularly supplied in the ordinary course

Section 63(2)(b) requires information of the relevant kind, or information from which the record is derived, to have been regularly fed into the system in the ordinary course of the relevant activities.

Example: A business routinely enters sales transactions into its accounting software. A report generated from those entries may satisfy this condition if the other statutory requirements are met.

An isolated or unexplained entry should not automatically be treated as reliable merely because it appears in a computer-generated report.

3. Proper functioning of the system

Section 63(2)(c) requires the computer or communication device to have been operating properly during the material period. If it was not operating properly or was out of operation, the problem must not have affected the electronic record or the accuracy of its contents.

Example: A CCTV system experiences a technical interruption. The court must consider whether the malfunction affected the relevant footage or its accuracy.

A malfunction does not necessarily invalidate every record generated by a system, but its effect on the particular record must be considered.

4. The record must reproduce or derive from information supplied in the ordinary course

Section 63(2)(d) requires the electronic record to reproduce or derive from information supplied to the computer or communication device in the ordinary course of the relevant activities.

Example: A company produces a report summarising transactions entered into its accounting system. The report must reproduce or derive from the relevant underlying information as required by the section.

This condition connects the record tendered in court with the information originally supplied to the system.

Section 63(3): Multiple Computers, Networks and Intermediaries

Section 63(3) recognises that electronic information may be created, stored or processed through several connected devices rather than a single computer.

Where the relevant function is regularly performed using one or more computers or communication devices, the section treats all devices used for that purpose during the relevant period as constituting a single computer or communication device for the purposes of the section.

The provision expressly covers five arrangements:

Clause	Arrangement	Example
(a)	Standalone mode	A computer operating independently
(b)	Computer system	Several connected components functioning as a system
(c)	Computer network	Computers exchanging information through a network
(d)	Computer resource enabling creation, processing or storage	A cloud-based platform or online storage system
(e)	Through an intermediary	Information processed or stored through an intermediary service

This provision is especially important when electronic records are generated through online services, cloud infrastructure or networked systems. The fact that several devices are involved does not, by itself, prevent the section from applying.

Section 63(4): Certificate for Electronic Evidence

Section 63(4) requires a certificate to accompany an electronic record when it is tendered for admission under the section. The certificate must address the matters specified in the subsection and the prescribed Schedule.

The certificate performs an important evidentiary function: it identifies the record, describes how it was produced and supplies relevant information about the device and the conditions governing the record.

What must the certificate contain?

The statutory requirements include:

1. Identification of the electronic record: The certificate must identify the record containing the statement and describe how it was produced.
2. Device particulars: It must provide appropriate particulars of the device or devices involved in producing the record.
3. Information concerning statutory conditions: It must address matters relating to the conditions in Section 63(2).
4. Signatures: It must be signed in the manner specified by subsection (4), including the appropriate person in charge of the computer or communication device, or the management of the relevant activities, and an expert.
5. Prescribed Schedule: The certificate must follow the form specified in the Schedule to the BSA.

The certificate may state the relevant matters to the best of the knowledge and belief of the person making the statement, as provided by subsection (4).

Is the certificate required every time electronic evidence is submitted?

Section 63(4) expressly states that the certificate is to be submitted along with the electronic record at each instance where it is being submitted for admission under the section.

The requirement must be applied to the record and the manner in which it is tendered. Parties should not assume that a certificate supplied for one electronic record automatically covers every other record or every later submission.

The Schedule to Section 63: Part A and Part B

The BSA includes a prescribed certificate in its Schedule, divided into two parts.

<box gap={3}> <row align=start gap={3}> <box background=”surface-secondary” radius=”lg” size=”44px” align=center justify=center> <icon name=”file-check” size=”xl”/> </box> <box flex=”1″ gap={1}> **Part A — Certificate by the party**

  Part A records information supplied by the party, including details identifying the digital record and its source, relevant device particulars, statements concerning regular use and operation, and the hash value or values of the electronic record.
</box>

</row> <divider color=”subtle”/> <row align=start gap={3}> <box background=”surface-secondary” radius=”lg” size=”44px” align=center justify=center> <icon name=”shield-check” size=”xl”/> </box> <box flex=”1″ gap={1}> **Part B — Certificate by an expert**

  Part B provides for expert certification concerning the electronic or digital record. The expert's role is relevant to the reliability and integrity of the record submitted as evidence.
</box>

</row> </box>

What is a hash value?

A hash value is a value generated from digital data using a specified algorithm. It functions as a digital fingerprint that can help identify a record and detect changes to it.

For example, a forensic examiner may calculate a hash value for a digital video file. If the file is altered, recalculating the hash may produce a different value.

A matching hash value supports the identification and integrity of the compared data. It does not, by itself, establish that the recording accurately depicts the event or that its contents are true.

Must Part B be signed only by an Examiner of Electronic Evidence notified under Section 79A of the Information Technology Act, 2000?

The Supreme Court considered this question in Pune Bar Association v. Union of India on 22 May 2026. The Court clarified that the Madras High Court’s earlier finding that Part B must be signed only by an Examiner of Electronic Evidence notified under Section 79A of the Information Technology Act should not be treated as a binding precedent.

The Supreme Court observed that a court may consider the opinion of another person with special skill and expertise in computer science and cyber forensics if satisfied on the basis of unimpeachable material. However, it expressly left the underlying question of law open and did not give a conclusive ruling on the issue.

Therefore, it would be inaccurate to state that the Supreme Court has conclusively ruled that only a Section 79A-notified examiner can sign Part B, or that any person may sign it without the necessary expertise and judicial scrutiny.

Practical Examples of Section 63 BSA

Example 1: WhatsApp chat export

A party wants to rely on an exported WhatsApp conversation to prove that a payment was promised.

The party must determine whether the export constitutes a computer output governed by Section 63 and comply with the applicable statutory conditions and certificate requirements. The court must also consider whether the conversation is authentic, complete and relevant.

Example 2: CCTV footage

A shop owner produces CCTV footage showing an alleged theft.

The party relying on the footage must establish the applicable conditions concerning the system, the recording and the certificate required by Section 63(4). The footage’s authenticity and evidentiary value must also be assessed.

Example 3: Email printout

A company produces a printed email to establish a contractual communication.

The printout may constitute a computer output under Section 63. The party must comply with the applicable requirements for admitting the record and establish its connection with the relevant email communication.

Also Read: Section 93 BSA: Presumption as to Electronic Records Five Years Old

Example 4: Call-detail records

Investigators seek to rely on call-detail records generated by a telecommunications system.

The relevant records must be produced and proved in accordance with the applicable statutory requirements. The court must also assess what the records actually establish; call-detail records may show communications or call metadata without necessarily proving the contents of a conversation.

Example 5: Cloud-based business records

A company produces an electronic report generated from a cloud-based accounting platform.

Section 63(3) expressly addresses information-processing arrangements involving networks, computer resources and intermediaries. The party must nevertheless establish the applicable conditions and provide the required certificate for the record being tendered.

Important Case Laws on Admissibility of Electronic Records

The following decisions are important for understanding Section 63 BSA. The first two interpreted Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, the predecessor provision. The third directly considered Section 63(4) BSA and its Schedule.

1. Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer (2014)

Citation: (2014) 10 SCC 473.

Court: Supreme Court of India.

Facts: The case arose from an election dispute involving electronic records, including compact discs containing recorded material.

Decision: The Supreme Court held that the admissibility of secondary electronic evidence under Section 65B of the former Evidence Act was governed by the special statutory requirements in that provision. Ordinary rules governing secondary documentary evidence could not simply be substituted for those requirements.

Legal principle: Electronic evidence must satisfy the applicable statutory conditions for admissibility. A party cannot bypass the special requirements governing electronic records by relying solely on general documentary evidence principles.

Relevance to Section 63 BSA: The judgment provides important background for understanding why the BSA has a separate statutory framework for electronic evidence. Its holding concerned the former Evidence Act, and the BSA’s own wording must be applied to proceedings governed by the new legislation.

2. Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal (2020)

Citation: (2020) 7 SCC 1.

Court: Supreme Court of India.

Facts: The case concerned electronic records relied upon in an election dispute and the certificate requirements under Section 65B of the former Evidence Act.

Decision: The Supreme Court reaffirmed the mandatory nature of the certificate requirement for covered computer outputs under the former Section 65B(4). It clarified the distinction between an original electronic record and a computer output and discussed the court’s role where a party requires assistance in obtaining the certificate.

Legal principle: The admissibility of covered computer outputs depends on compliance with the applicable statutory requirements. The distinction between an original electronic record and a copy or computer output is important.

Relevance to Section 63 BSA: This decision is a leading authority on the predecessor electronic-evidence framework. Its principles are relevant background, but the certificate requirements under the BSA must be examined under Section 63(4) and the Schedule.

3. Pune Bar Association v. Union of India (2026)

Case reference: W.P. (C) No. 599 of 2026, order dated 22 May 2026.

Court: Supreme Court of India.

Issue: The petitioner challenged the constitutional validity of Section 63(4) BSA and its Schedule, arguing that the requirements relating to the hash value and expert certification imposed undue hardship on litigants.

Decision: The Supreme Court held that the hash-value and expert-certification requirements had a rational connection with the statutory objective of protecting the authenticity and integrity of electronic evidence. It did not find the requirements arbitrary or unreasonable on the grounds advanced.

The Court also considered whether Part B could be signed only by an Examiner of Electronic Evidence notified under Section 79A of the Information Technology Act. It clarified that the Madras High Court’s view requiring such an examiner exclusively should not be treated as a binding precedent. The Court observed that another person with special expertise in computer science and cyber forensics may be considered if the court is satisfied on the basis of unimpeachable material. It nevertheless left the legal question open.

Legal principle: The prescribed certificate, including its hash-value and expert-certification elements, serves an important purpose in protecting the integrity of electronic evidence.

Relevance to Section 63 BSA: This is a particularly important decision because it directly addresses the certificate framework under the BSA, rather than merely interpreting the predecessor Evidence Act.

Difference Between Section 63 BSA and Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872

Section 63 BSA corresponds to Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

Basis	Section 63 BSA	Section 65B Indian Evidence Act
Subject	Admissibility of electronic records	Admissibility of electronic records
Computer outputs	Recognised subject to statutory conditions	Recognised subject to statutory conditions
Regular-use and proper-functioning conditions	Covered	Covered
Multiple computers and networks	Expressly addresses systems, networks, computer resources and intermediaries	Contained the former framework for computer outputs
Certificate	Subsection (4) requires a certificate and refers to the prescribed Schedule	Subsection (4) prescribed certificate requirements under the former Act
Hash value and expert certification	The BSA Schedule expressly includes these elements	The former statutory form did not contain the same express Schedule requirements
Current application	Applies where the BSA governs the proceeding	May remain relevant under applicable transitional and savings provisions

Although the two provisions share a similar structure, the BSA contains express certificate requirements and a prescribed Schedule that must be considered when applying Section 63.

Difference Between Sections 61, 62 and 63 BSA

Provision	Main purpose
Section 61	Recognises the legal effect, validity and enforceability of electronic or digital records, subject to Section 63
Section 62	Provides that electronic-record contents may be proved in accordance with Section 63
Section 63	Sets out the conditions for admitting covered computer outputs and the certificate requirements

These provisions form a connected framework. Section 61 recognises electronic records, Section 62 directs how their contents are to be proved, and Section 63 prescribes the applicable admissibility requirements.

Related Provisions of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023

• Section 2: Definitions relevant to documents and electronic records.
• Section 57: Primary evidence, including specific explanations relating to electronic and digital records.
• Section 61: Electronic or digital record.
• Section 62: Special provisions as to evidence relating to electronic records.
• Section 63: Admissibility of electronic records.
• Section 39: Opinions of experts, including opinions relating to electronic or digital information.
• Section 86: Presumptions as to electronic records and digital signatures, where applicable.

Important Points for Law Students and Judiciary Aspirants

• Section 63 BSA governs the admissibility of covered electronic records and computer outputs.
• It corresponds to Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
• Section 63(2) sets out four conditions relating to regular use, ordinary-course information, proper functioning and the accuracy of the resulting record.
• Section 63(3) addresses systems involving multiple computers, networks, computer resources and intermediaries.
• Section 63(4) requires a certificate accompanying the electronic record at each instance it is tendered for admission under the section.
• The prescribed Schedule contains Part A and Part B, including the hash-value and expert-certification elements.
• A hash value helps identify and verify digital data but does not independently prove that the contents are true.
• Admissibility and evidentiary weight are separate questions.
• Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer and Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal are leading decisions under the predecessor Evidence Act.
• Pune Bar Association v. Union of India (2026) directly addresses the constitutionality and interpretation of the BSA’s certificate framework.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

1. What is Section 63 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023?

Section 63 prescribes the conditions under which specified electronic records and computer outputs may be admitted as evidence. It also sets out certificate requirements for records tendered under the section.

2. Which section of the Indian Evidence Act corresponds to Section 63 BSA?

Section 63 BSA corresponds to Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

3. Is a certificate required for electronic evidence under Section 63 BSA?

Section 63(4) requires a certificate to accompany the electronic record at each instance where it is submitted for admission under the section. The certificate must satisfy the statutory requirements and the prescribed Schedule.

4. What are the four conditions under Section 63(2) BSA?

The conditions concern regular use of the computer or communication device, regular supply of relevant information in the ordinary course, proper functioning of the system, and the requirement that the record reproduce or derive from information supplied in the ordinary course.

5. What is the purpose of the hash value in the Section 63 certificate?

A hash value acts as a digital fingerprint that helps identify the electronic record and detect changes in the compared data. It supports integrity verification but does not independently prove the truth of the record’s contents.

6. Can WhatsApp messages be admitted under Section 63 BSA?

WhatsApp messages may be admitted if they are relevant and the applicable statutory requirements are satisfied. Where the messages are tendered as a computer output governed by Section 63, the requirements of the section and its certificate framework must be considered.

7. What did the Supreme Court decide in Pune Bar Association v. Union of India?

In its order dated 22 May 2026, the Supreme Court held that the hash-value and expert-certification requirements under Section 63(4) and its Schedule had a rational connection with the objective of protecting the integrity of electronic evidence. It also clarified that the Madras High Court’s view requiring Part B to be signed exclusively by a Section 79A-notified examiner should not be treated as a binding precedent, while leaving the underlying legal question open.

8. Does a Section 63 certificate prove that an electronic record is genuine?

A certificate addresses statutory matters relating to the record and its production. It does not automatically establish every issue concerning authenticity, relevance, completeness or the truth of the record’s contents. Those questions remain subject to the evidence and applicable law.

Conclusion

Section 63 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 establishes the statutory framework for admitting electronic records and computer outputs. It sets out conditions relating to the system’s use, information processing, proper functioning and the accuracy of the resulting record, alongside the certificate requirements under subsection (4) and the Schedule. For examinations and practical legal work, the most important points are the four conditions under subsection (2), the treatment of connected computer systems under subsection (3), the certificate framework, and the Supreme Court’s 2026 order in Pune Bar Association v. Union of India.

dfsad