Trace Your Case

ARJUN PANDITRAO KHOTKAR V. KAILASH KUSHANRAO GORANTYAL

Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kaislash Kushanrao Gorantyal (2020) 7 SCC 1]

ISSUE:

  • Whether the video compact disks could be admitted in evidence in the absence of a certificate under Section 65B of the Evidence Act?

RULE:

  • A certificate under Section 65B is mandatory for the admissibility of electronic records, to be provided by the individual who generated the copy from the device, provided the device was operational at the time the data was recorded and the copy was created.
  • If the original electronic document is produced, the certificate is not needed. The device owner can testify, but if the device cannot be presented, the certificate is required.
  • Electronic evidence must be submitted before trial begins, but courts may allow certificate production later based on circumstances.

FACTS:

  • Two petitions challenged the appellant’s election to the legislative assembly.
  • The respondents claimed the appellant’s nomination papers were improperly accepted after the cut-off time.
  • Video recordings were produced as evidence, but no Section 65B certificate was provided.
  • The High Court admitted the videos without the certificate.

HELD:

  • The Supreme Court reaffirmed Anvar PV, ruling that the Section 65B certificate is mandatory for electronic evidence.