Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal & Others
Bench: Constitution Bench — 3 Judges (R.F. Nariman, S. Ravindra Bhat & V. Ramasubramanian JJ)
Parties
Facts of the Case
This case arose as a follow-up to Anvar P.V. (2014) on the Section 65B IEA certificate requirement for electronic evidence. Practical problems had emerged: the prosecution often failed to obtain Section 65B certificates at the time of seizing electronic devices, leading to electronic evidence being excluded at trial. The question was whether the certificate can be obtained later — at trial stage — and whether courts can compel production of the certificate if the party with custody of the electronic record refuses to furnish it.
Legal Issues Before the Court
- 1Can the Section 65B certificate be obtained and produced at trial, or must it be contemporaneous with the creation of the electronic record?
- 2Can courts compel the production of a Section 65B certificate using Section 91 CrPC if the party who has custody refuses to furnish it?
- 3How does the Section 65B requirement apply to the original electronic record versus copies?
The Judgment
The Supreme Court upheld and clarified Anvar P.V. The Court held: (1) the Section 65B certificate can be obtained and furnished at trial — it need not be contemporaneous; (2) if the party who controls the electronic record refuses to furnish the certificate, the court can issue a summons under Section 91 CrPC compelling production; (3) the certificate is required for secondary copies of electronic records — if the original device is produced, no certificate is needed. The Court also overruled Shafhi Mohammad v. State of HP (2018) which had suggested the certificate was not mandatory in all cases.
Key Principles Laid Down
CERTIFICATE CAN BE OBTAINED AT TRIAL STAGE: The Section 65B(4) IEA certificate does not need to be prepared at the time of seizure — it can be furnished at any stage before or during trial. This addresses the practical problem of police failing to obtain the certificate at the time of seizing devices.
COURT CAN COMPEL CERTIFICATE PRODUCTION: If the party controlling the electronic system refuses to furnish the Section 65B certificate, the court can issue a Section 91 CrPC summons to compel its production. This prevents deliberate withholding of certificates to exclude electronic evidence.
ORIGINAL DEVICE = NO CERTIFICATE NEEDED: Where the original electronic device itself is produced before the court — the actual hard disk, memory card, or phone — the Section 65B certificate is not required. The certificate requirement is for secondary evidence (copies, printouts, CDs).
SHAFHI MOHAMMAD OVERRULED: The Supreme Court in Arjun Panditrao expressly overruled Shafhi Mohammad v. State of HP (2018), which had suggested that courts have discretion to admit electronic evidence without a Section 65B certificate. After Arjun Panditrao, the certificate is mandatory for all secondary electronic records — no exceptions.
BSA 2023 SECTION 63: The BSA 2023 codifies and refines the 65B framework in Section 63, incorporating the Arjun Panditrao clarifications about when certificates are required.
Impact on Indian Law
Arjun Panditrao (2020) is the definitive Supreme Court ruling on the Section 65B certificate — clarifying the ambiguities left by Anvar P.V. and overruling conflicting High Court and Supreme Court pronouncements. The two cases together — Anvar P.V. and Arjun Panditrao — must be read as a unit for the complete law on electronic evidence admissibility in India. The BSA 2023's Section 63 framework is understood through these two cases.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does the Section 65B certificate need to be obtained at the time of seizing the electronic device?
No. Arjun Panditrao (2020) held that the Section 65B IEA certificate (Section 63 BSA) can be obtained and produced at any stage — including at trial. It need not be contemporaneous with seizure. If the party controlling the electronic record refuses to furnish it, the court can compel production by issuing a Section 91 CrPC summons.
Is the Section 65B certificate required if the original mobile phone or hard disk is produced in court?
No. Per Anvar P.V. (2014) and Arjun Panditrao (2020), the Section 65B / BSA 63 certificate is only required for secondary electronic records — copies, printouts, screenshots, CDs. Where the original device itself is produced before the court, the certificate is not required.