Chain of Custody and the Section 63 Certificate for Electronic Evidence Under the BSA (2026)

Explainer · Evidence · BSA

Updated for 2026 · Claw Editorial

You have a WhatsApp chat, an email, or a CCTV clip that proves your case. The problem is not getting the file. The problem is getting the court to accept it, because electronic evidence is easy to copy, edit and question. The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA), the new evidence law, deals with this in Section 63. It sets out how a computer output or electronic record is proved, with a certificate, expert support, and a clear chain of custody. This explainer sets out what Section 63 requires and how it differs from the old Section 65B. Last verified October 2026.

01Why electronic evidence is hard to prove

Electronic evidence is different from a paper document. A chat, an email, a photo, or a video is just data, and data can be copied, edited, or faked without leaving an obvious mark. A court cannot simply trust a printout or a pen drive.

So the law asks for proof that the record is genuine and unchanged: proof of where the data came from, how it was handled, and that what the court sees is what was originally there. That is the job of the certificate, the chain of custody, and the hash value.

With electronic evidence the real question is not whether you have the file, but whether you can prove it is genuine and unchanged.

02The law: Section 63 BSA (old Section 65B)

Electronic evidence is now governed by Section 63 of the BSA, which came into force on 1 July 2024. It replaces Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. The scheme is similar: an electronic record can be treated as a document and admitted without producing the original device, if the conditions in the section are met.

Note that this is an evidence provision, not an offence. There is no punishment attached to Section 63. It only decides how an electronic record is proved and admitted in court. For the broader shift, see our explainer on the BSA vs the Evidence Act key changes, and on electronic evidence under Section 63 BSA.

03What the certificate must cover

The certificate is the heart of Section 63. In broad terms it must identify the electronic record, describe how it was produced, give the particulars of the device involved, and be signed by the person responsible and, under the BSA, by an expert.

• Identify the record. It must say what the electronic record is and how it is produced.
• Describe the device. It must give the particulars of the device or process that produced the output.
• Be signed properly. It must be signed by the person in charge of the device and, under the BSA, supported by a certificate from an expert.

Section 63(4) requires the certificate to be submitted along with the electronic record. The word used is that it "shall" be submitted, which removes the old debate about whether it was optional.

04Chain of custody and hash values

Even a correct certificate is not enough if the record could have been tampered with between collection and court. This is where chain of custody and hash values come in.

Chain of custody

Chain of custody is the documented history of the evidence: who collected it, when, how it was stored, who handled it, and how it reached the court. A clean, unbroken record makes it hard to argue that the data was changed. A gap in that record is the first thing the other side will attack.

Hash values

A hash value is a unique fingerprint of a file. If even one bit of the file changes, the hash changes. By recording the hash at the time of collection and checking it again later, a party can show the file is exactly the same as when it was seized. The BSA framework ties the certificate to this kind of technical assurance.

05What changed from Section 65B

The structure of the old Section 65B is preserved, but the BSA tightens it.

• The certificate is clearly mandatory. Section 65B(4) used the word "may", which courts read as mandatory after much litigation. Section 63(4) BSA uses "shall", settling the point in the text itself.
• Expert support and hash values. The BSA brings in an expert certificate and technical safeguards like hash values, which were not spelled out in the old provision.

The Supreme Court had already held the certificate to be essential under the old law, first in Anvar P.V. v P.K. Basheer and then in Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal. The BSA builds on this line of decisions. For a related evidence topic, see secondary evidence under the BSA.

06Practical points

• Get the certificate early. Arrange the Section 63 certificate when you collect the record, not on the eve of the hearing.
• Record the hash at collection. Note the hash value when the device or file is first seized, so you can prove it later.
• Document every hand-off. Keep a written chain of custody from collection to court, with dates and names.
• Do not rely on a bare printout. A printout or copy without the certificate is weak, and may be refused.
• Use the expert. Where the BSA calls for expert support, plan for it in advance.

For how expert opinion fits the picture, see expert opinion under Section 39 BSA.

07Where Claw fits

Claw is an all-in-one legaltech platform for Indian advocates, law firms, and corporate legal teams, combining AI-based case search, an AI legal assistant (Legal GPT), case management, and compliance automation across all Indian courts and tribunals.

Whether a WhatsApp chat or a CCTV clip gets admitted usually comes down to how courts have read the certificate and the chain of custody in past cases. Claw turns that into a quick search: across 30 crore+ judgments you can find how benches have treated electronic evidence on facts close to yours, with results in under 5 seconds. You can also track the cases, orders and hearings of the matters where you are relying on such evidence, by party or advocate name, across 9,102 courts, benches and forums. Supreme Court judgments reach back to 1950 and High Court judgments to 1990. Claw does not use customer documents to train its AI models.

Open a free Claw account to look up electronic-evidence rulings and follow your own matters by party or advocate name. To research case law across courts, see case search across Indian courts.

08Sources and further reading

• India Code (BSA, 2023 bare text): indiacode.nic.in
• Ministry of Home Affairs (new criminal laws): mha.gov.in
• Claw: clawlaw.in

This explainer is general information, not legal advice. The certificate and chain-of-custody requirements can turn on the exact text and the facts, so check the current provision and take advice from counsel.

09Frequently asked questions