It is reported that an expert committee on Cyber crimes has amongst other things recommended an amendment to Indian Evidence Act.
Ostensibly the objective is to help law enforcement agencies to tackle new generation of cyber crimes particularly the mobile and cloud related crimes.
While the intention is appreciated, it is not clear what exactly is being sought.
This report in Hindu makes a reference to Section 65B of Indian Evidence Act and hints at some misunderstanding about the section.
Section 65B provides an option to convert electronic evidence to be presented in a Court in an admissible form. The presentation can be either in electronic form with a digital signature authentication or in paper form with written signature and should contain an appropriate certification.
The certification is meant to build prima facie validity to the evidence and fixing accountability to the person producing the evidence.
There is some confusion on who has to sign the certificate and the Hindu report also suggests the same.
It is to be understood that Section 65B certificate only certifies the conversion of electronic evidence present in one form to another form in which it can be presented to a Court. It does not validate the truthfulness of the content but only tells the Court that “This is what is present in Cyber Space”. It is a “matter of fact” certification of something present in cyber space which is copied into a CD or printed out for the purpose of presentation to the Court. What Section 65B certificate provides is an assurance to the Court that this process of conversion has been made in accordance with the procedure mentioned in the section and certified as indicated there in.
I wish that before making any amendments, the Government explores providing an “Explanation” and avoids creating any further confusion on the interpretation of the section.
We must reiterate that in the case of Section 66A, the inadequacies and ignorance of the Police was carried through the system and finally a wrong decision was taken at the highest level. Similarly, the suggestions of the Home Ministry for amending of the evidence act may result in wrong decisions if they are not properly discussed and evaluated. I hope the Government would not be in a hurry to carry out an amendment before such a debate.
Naavi
