Case Name : Arjun Panditrao Khotkar vs Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal
Case Reference: (2020) 7 SCR 180
Neutral Citation: 2020 INSC 453
Case Number: CA Nos 20825-20826/2017
Court: Supreme Court
Bench: 03
Coram: RF Nariman (Author), S Ravindra Bhat, V Ramasubramanian (Concurring)
Date: 14.07.2020
Evidence - Section 65 differentiates between existence, condition, and contents of a document. (Para 19) 1. Existence goes into the admissibility of a document. 2. Contents are to be proved after a document becomes admissible. 3. Evidence - Section 65A speaks of contents of electronic records being proved in accordance with Evidence - Section 65B 4. Evidence - Section 65B speaks of admissibility of electronic records which deals with existence and contents of electronic records being proved once admissible into evidence.
The deeming fiction in Evidence - Section 65B is there since document as defined by Evidence - Section 3 does not include electronic records. (Para 21)
The conditions in Evidence - Section 65B are cumulative and the word any must be read as all (Para 23)
The deeming fiction in Evidence - Section 65B which makes the information in the electronic record a document admissible only if the further conditions are satisfied as to both the information and the computer in question (Para 30) Evidence - Section 65B differentiates between (Para 31) original document, which would be the original electronic record in the computer in which the original information is first stored, and the computer output containing such information which may be treated as evidence of the contents of the original document.
Certificate is mandatory, a condition precedent
Production of certificate under section 65B is mandatory (Para 59)
Requirement of certificate when Original Document is proved
The requisite certificate under [Evidence - Section 65B] is unnecessary if the original document itself is proved (Para 32). This can be done by the owner of a laptop computer, computer tablet, mobile phone stepping into the witness box and proving that the connected device on which the original information is first stored (Para 59)
Assumption of completion of investigation
Electronic evidence should be filed latest before commencement of trial (Para 52-53) It is assumed that investigation has been completed, concretised once chargesheet / prosecution complaint is filed.
Court’s discretion for certificate being produced later on
Depends on facts of the case whether court should allow subsequent production of the certificate. (Para 55). However, court has the power to allow certificate at any stage (Para 57)
Refer also: Bansilal Agarwalla vs State of Bihar (1962) 1 SCR 33 at para 3 “Any one” can be interpreted as “everyone” and there is no question of violation of Constitution - Article 14
Om Parkash vs Union of India, (2010) 4 SCC 17 at para 70 Upholding view of Full Bench in Balak Ram Gupta vs Union of India, AIR 1987 Del 239; to say that “any” can be read as “all”
See also: Evidence - Section 3
SCR PDF - Arjun Panditrao Khotkar vs Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal, (2020) 7 SCR 180.pdf
Web Link: URL of judgment