Evidence Act 1872 Section 90A
Evidence Act 1872 Section 90A defines the presumption of genuineness for electronic records, crucial for digital evidence admissibility.
Evidence Act Section 90A deals with the presumption that electronic records are genuine. This provision is vital in today's digital age, where electronic evidence is common in courts. It helps establish the authenticity of electronic documents, making it easier for parties to rely on digital data during trials.
Understanding Section 90A is important for legal professionals handling civil or criminal cases involving electronic evidence. It ensures that electronic records are treated fairly and consistently, supporting efficient judicial processes and reducing disputes over authenticity.
Evidence Act Section 90A – Exact Provision
This section creates a legal presumption that electronic records are genuine if they come from a computer regularly used for storing or processing information. The presumption shifts the burden to the opposing party to prove otherwise. It simplifies the acceptance of electronic evidence, reducing the need for extensive proof about how the record was created.
Presumes electronic records are genuine if from a regularly used computer.
Applies unless contrary evidence is provided.
Facilitates admissibility of digital evidence in court.
Shifts burden to challenge authenticity onto the opposing party.
Supports efficient handling of electronic documents in trials.
Explanation of Evidence Act Section 90A
Section 90A establishes a presumption regarding the authenticity of electronic records produced by computers used regularly.
The section states that electronic records are presumed genuine if generated by a computer regularly used for information processing.
This affects litigants, courts, and parties relying on electronic evidence.
The key evidentiary requirement is proof that the computer was regularly used during the relevant period.
Triggering events include submission of electronic records as evidence.
Admissible evidence includes emails, digital documents, and data stored electronically.
Records can be challenged if contrary proof shows tampering or irregularity.
Purpose and Rationale of Evidence Act Section 90A
The section aims to ensure that electronic records are treated as reliable evidence, promoting fairness and efficiency in judicial proceedings involving digital data.
Ensures reliable evidence from electronic sources.
Promotes fairness by balancing evidentiary burdens.
Prevents misuse or false denial of electronic records.
Strengthens truth-finding in cases involving digital evidence.
When Evidence Act Section 90A Applies
Section 90A applies when electronic records are presented as evidence in civil or criminal cases, provided the computer system was regularly used for storing or processing information.
Applies upon submission of electronic records in court.
Can be invoked by parties relying on digital evidence.
Relevant in both criminal and civil contexts.
Scope limited to records from regularly used computer systems.
Exceptions include evidence disproving genuineness or regular use.
Burden and Standard of Proof under Evidence Act Section 90A
The burden initially lies on the party presenting the electronic record to show it was produced by a regularly used computer. Once this is established, the presumption of genuineness applies, and the opposing party must prove otherwise. The standard is on a balance of probabilities, consistent with civil evidentiary standards. This section interacts with Sections 101–114 by providing a statutory presumption that can be rebutted with contrary evidence.
Burden on proponent to show regular computer use.
Opposing party must disprove genuineness to rebut presumption.
Standard of proof is preponderance of probabilities.
Nature of Evidence under Evidence Act Section 90A
Section 90A deals with the admissibility and presumption of electronic evidence. It sets procedural obligations to establish regular computer use but does not cover oral or documentary evidence outside electronic records. Limitations include the ability to rebut the presumption with contrary proof.
Focuses on electronic records' admissibility and presumption.
Requires proof of regular computer use.
Does not apply to non-electronic evidence.
Allows rebuttal with evidence of tampering or irregularity.
Stage of Proceedings Where Evidence Act Section 90A Applies
Section 90A is relevant primarily during the trial stage when electronic records are tendered as evidence. It may also apply during investigation if electronic evidence is collected and in appeals if admissibility is questioned. The section guides courts during cross-examination and evidence evaluation.
Trial stage when electronic evidence is presented.
Investigation stage for collection and verification.
Appeal stage if admissibility is challenged.
Cross-examination to test authenticity.
Appeal and Challenge Options under Evidence Act Section 90A
Admissibility rulings under Section 90A can be challenged through appeals or revisions. Higher courts may interfere if there is a clear error in applying the presumption or evaluating contrary evidence. Appellate review focuses on whether the presumption was correctly applied and rebutted.
Appeals against trial court admissibility decisions.
Revisions for procedural or legal errors.
Higher courts review presumption application and rebuttal.
Timelines follow general appellate procedures.
Example of Evidence Act Section 90A in Practical Use
Person X submits an email printout as evidence in a contract dispute. The email was stored on a company computer regularly used for communication. Under Section 90A, the court presumes the email is genuine unless the opposing party proves tampering. This helps X establish authenticity without extensive technical proof.
Presumption aids in accepting electronic evidence efficiently.
Opposing party must provide evidence to challenge authenticity.
Historical Background of Evidence Act Section 90A
Introduced to address challenges posed by electronic evidence, Section 90A was added to the Evidence Act to adapt to technological advances. Courts initially struggled with digital evidence authenticity, prompting legislative clarity. Judicial interpretations have refined its application over time.
Added to Evidence Act to cover electronic records.
Responded to increasing use of computers in evidence.
Judicial evolution clarified scope and rebuttal standards.
Modern Relevance of Evidence Act Section 90A
In 2026, Section 90A is crucial due to widespread digital evidence in courts. It supports e-courts and digital record management, enabling efficient and reliable evidence handling. The section aligns with judicial reforms promoting technology use in legal processes.
Applies to digital and electronic evidence in modern trials.
Supports e-court infrastructure and digital workflows.
Facilitates judicial acceptance of electronic records.
Related Evidence Act Sections
- Evidence Act Section 65B – Admissibility of Electronic Records
– Details conditions for electronic evidence to be admissible in court.
- Evidence Act Section 90 – Presumption as to Documents Produced by Devices
– Covers presumption related to documents produced by devices other than computers.
- Evidence Act Section 101 – Burden of Proof
– Defines who carries the burden of proof in civil cases.
- Evidence Act Section 114 – Court’s Power to Presume
– Allows courts to make presumptions based on common experience.
- Information Technology Act Section 65 – Tampering with Computer Source Documents
– Addresses offenses related to electronic record tampering.
- CrPC Section 65B – Procedure for Electronic Evidence
– Provides procedural rules for electronic evidence admissibility.
Case References under Evidence Act Section 90A
- Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer (2014, 10 SCC 473)
– Supreme Court clarified conditions for admissibility of electronic records under Section 65B, impacting Section 90A presumptions.
- Shafhi Mohammad v. State of Himachal Pradesh (2018, 7 SCC 780)
– Court emphasized the importance of Section 65B certificate for electronic evidence authenticity.
- State of Tamil Nadu v. Suhas Katti (2004, 5 SCC 518)
– Landmark case on electronic evidence and presumption of genuineness.
Key Facts Summary for Evidence Act Section 90A
- Section:
90A
- Title:
Presumption as to Electronic Records
- Category:
Presumption, Admissibility, Electronic Evidence
- Applies To:
Litigants, Courts, Parties relying on electronic records
- Proceeding Type:
Civil and Criminal Trials, Appeals
- Interaction With:
Sections 65B, 90, 101, 114, IT Act provisions
- Key Use:
Establishing authenticity of electronic records through presumption
Conclusion on Evidence Act Section 90A
Section 90A plays a pivotal role in modern Indian evidence law by providing a statutory presumption that electronic records produced by regularly used computers are genuine. This presumption streamlines the admissibility process, reducing the burden on parties to prove authenticity in every case.
Its importance continues to grow with increasing reliance on digital evidence in courts. Understanding Section 90A helps legal practitioners effectively present and challenge electronic evidence, ensuring fair and efficient judicial outcomes in the digital era.
FAQs on Evidence Act Section 90A
What does Section 90A of the Evidence Act state?
Section 90A presumes that electronic records produced by a computer regularly used for storing or processing information are genuine unless proven otherwise. This helps in admitting digital evidence in court.
Who benefits from the presumption under Section 90A?
Parties submitting electronic records benefit as the presumption eases proving authenticity. However, opposing parties can challenge this by providing contrary evidence.
Can the presumption under Section 90A be rebutted?
Yes, the presumption is rebuttable. If evidence shows tampering, irregularity, or that the computer was not regularly used, the court may reject the presumption.
Does Section 90A apply to all electronic evidence?
It applies specifically to electronic records produced by computers regularly used for information processing. Other electronic evidence may fall under different provisions like Section 65B.
How does Section 90A interact with Section 65B?
Section 65B sets detailed conditions for admissibility of electronic evidence, while Section 90A provides a presumption of genuineness. Both work together to establish authenticity and admissibility of digital records.