The Supreme Court has observed that the Court had in its earlier judgment held that the requirement of certificate under Section 65B(4) of Evidence Act for the production of Electronic Evidence is not always mandatory and that it needs reconsideration.
In Arjun Panditrao Khotkar vs. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal , The Supreme Court bench comprising of Justice Ashok Bhushan and Justice Naveen Shah observed that, with the passage of time, reliance On electronic records is bound to increase. The law therefore needs to be laid down in this regard with certainty. The Court, therefore, considered it appropriate to refer the matter to larger bench and mentioned needless to say that there is an element of urgency in the matter.
Previously, in Shafhi Mohammad vs. State of Himachal Pradesh, The Supreme Court had observed that a party who is not in possession of a device from which the electronic document is produced, cannot be required to produce certificate under section 65B(4). Thus, the Bench referring to a number of similar judgments held that applicability of procedural requirement under Section 65(B) of the Evidence Act which requires furnishing certificate is to be applied only when such electronic evidence is in produced by the said party and the device producing the document is in his control and not of the opposite party.