65B Certificate is must for evidence to be admissisable

Evidence Act – Section 65-B – Electronic evidence in form of call detail records must be accompanied by a certificate of authenticity as mandated under the section – Failure to produce such certificate and reliance on handwritten notes and unproved mobile number ownership renders electronic evidence inadmissiable – Prosecution evidence held insufficient to establish conspiracy or involvement.

Overview and Previous Case Law

In a recent case in the Supreme Court of India, ‘State of Rajasthan vs. Bhanwar Singh & Ors. (Judgement dated September 26, 2025),” some serious crimes were alleged. In such trial proceedings, the major issue in the case was whether the evidence in the hands of police and the prosecution was bona fide and corroborated enough for a legal conviction of the accused. The High Court in the case, had acquitted all accused, against the wishes of the State had wanted to pursue the case to the Supreme Court. The issue of case in Supreme Court was whether Indian Evidence Act in question was section 65B was adhered to viz the admitting of electronic evidence, in the form of mobile call details.

What Is Section 65B and How Is It Important?

Section 65 B under Evidence Act, India, says, for any computer, mobile, or electronic device to be used as evidence in a court of law, it must be accompanied by a specific certification known as the “65B certificate.” This certificate must describe the process of how the data was created, stored, and its authenticity. It serves as evidence that the electronic record has not been altered and is in its original form. Most of digital evidence is not even admissible in court if the 65B certificate is absent.

The Supreme Court in Anvar P.V. vs P.K. Basheer decided that the 65B certificate is not a formality, but is essential. P is equally true in Arjun Panditrao Khotkar vs. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal.

The Importance of 65B Certificate in This Case

In this instance, the police presented the accused's phone call logs in form of call detail records. But, the records were not accompanied by a warranted Section 65B Certificate. The records were not even in the form of the company’s original prints but were in the form of handwritten notes. The author of these notes was not produced in court. Hence, the Supreme Court ruled these records as inadmissible evidence.

This instance indicates the fact that even digital evidence without certification holds no weight in court. The law will not accept an electronic document as proof without authentication of the document not being altered in any way, and the certificate establishes this.

Other Evidence, Not The Only Evidence

The court also considered physical evidence such as the blood-stained chunni (piece of cloth) that was recovered from the accused’s house. However, the cloth was located in an area that others could easily access, and without forensic evidence directly tying the cloth to the victim, the court did not view this as conclusive evidence. Under the Evidence Act, evidence must be relevant, creditable, and demonstrate the accused's active participation in the crime.

As with other statements, court testimony given long after the events in question, or testimony that appeared “out of place”, was given special scrutiny. The judges reminded the audience that, “under the Evidence Act, witnesses are required to provide reasonable accounts of their experiences that are consistent with the expectations of human behavior.”

The Court's Decision

The Court, by the end, seemed to think that the prosecution was unable to adequately establish the guilt of the accused. There were the following reasons:

• No call records, as there was no 65B certificate accompanying the digital evidence.
• Testimonial evidence was either weak, or the evidence as a whole was unreliable.

The Supreme Court, therefore, was in agreement with the decision of the High Court, once more underlining the necessity of compliance with the Evidence Act in the Primary statement, particularly Section 65B concerning electronic evidence. These example is future cases: evidence is procedure and paperwork are equally important as the evidence itself.

Bottom Line

A 65B certificate is a fundamental requirement to accept electronic records in court as evidence. The records under question are electronic and untouched, a 65B certificate is the only reliable testimony. The Supreme Court judgment elaborated these points, showing that authorities do not silence unreasonable doubts concerning evidence.

Reference Links:

THE INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 Last updated:-13-3-2020: 1. https://www.indiacode.nic.in/bitstream/123456789/15351/1/iea_1872.pdf