Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023, Provisions, Indian Evidence Act

The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA) 2023 is one of India’s three new criminal laws that replaced the Indian Evidence Act 1872. Along with the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, it came into force on 1 July 2024. The Act largely retains the core principles of evidence law while updating provisions to recognise electronic and digital evidence, improve clarity, and align the legal framework with modern technology and contemporary criminal investigations.

Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023

India’s criminal justice system evolved through different historical periods before the British codified criminal laws. The Indian Evidence Act 1872 enacted by the Imperial Legislative Council governed the admissibility of evidence in courts for over 150 years. In December 2023, Parliament passed the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023 as part of a comprehensive overhaul of criminal laws. Although the new Act preserves most evidence rules of the earlier law, it introduces important reforms for electronic records and digital evidence suited to present day legal requirements.

Indian Evidence Act 1872

The Indian Evidence Act 1872 formed the foundation of evidence law in India for more than 150 years before being replaced.

• The Indian Evidence Act was enacted in 1872 by the Imperial Legislative Council to establish uniform rules governing the admissibility, relevance and proof of evidence before Indian courts.
• The Act worked alongside the Indian Penal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure, creating a complete legal framework for investigation, prosecution and trial of criminal offences.

‹ ›

Indian Evidence Act 1872 Features

The major provisions and features of the Indian Evidence Act 1872 include:

• Structure of the Act: The Indian Evidence Act consisted of 167 sections, 11 chapters, and 3 parts, providing comprehensive rules on documentary evidence, oral evidence, presumptions, burden of proof and witness examination.
• Admissible evidence: The Act recognised only legally admissible evidence, broadly classifying it into facts in issue and relevant facts, which determined the rights, liabilities or issues involved in a legal proceeding.
• Types of evidence: Evidence under the Act mainly included oral evidence through witness testimony and documentary evidence, which covered writings, maps, printed material and similar documents before digital expansion.
• Proof of facts: A fact was considered proved when the court believed it existed or found its existence so probable that a prudent person would reasonably act on that belief.
• Confession before police: Confessions made to police officers or while in police custody remained inadmissible unless recorded by a Magistrate, protecting accused persons from involuntary or coerced confessions.
• Discovery rule: Information supplied by an accused in police custody remained admissible only when it directly resulted in the discovery of a relevant fact connected with the investigation.
• Need for replacement: Multiple amendments, rapid technological developments, increasing reliance on electronic records and evolving judicial interpretations gradually made several provisions less suited for modern digital evidence.

Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023 Provisions

The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA) retains most provisions of the earlier law while introducing targeted reforms for electronic records and digital evidence.

• Implementation with new criminal laws: The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam replaced the Indian Evidence Act 1872 and came into force on 1 July 2024 together with the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
• Retention of core principles: Fundamental concepts such as admissible evidence, facts in issue, relevant facts, burden of proof, documentary evidence, oral evidence and police confession rules continue substantially without major changes.
• Expanded definition of document: The Act expressly includes electronic and digital records within the definition of documents, covering emails, server logs, computer files, smartphone data, websites, voice mails and locational evidence.
• Recognition of electronic records: Information printed, stored or processed through computers, optical media, magnetic media or combinations of computer systems is recognised as documentary evidence under the Act.
• Primary electronic evidence: Simultaneously stored, transmitted or broadcast electronic recordings are treated as primary evidence, allowing investigators to rely on identical stored copies even if the original source is destroyed.
• Broader secondary evidence: Secondary evidence now includes oral and written admissions, along with testimony from skilled persons who have examined the original document, expanding the earlier evidentiary framework.
• Electronic oral evidence: Witnesses, victims and accused persons are permitted to provide oral evidence through electronic means, facilitating digital participation in judicial proceedings.
• Joint trial clarification: The Act expands the joint trial provision by treating proceedings involving absconding accused persons or those who fail to respond to arrest warrants as joint trials for evidentiary purposes.
• Electronic evidence framework: The Act restructures provisions dealing with electronic evidence, synchronises terminology with the Information Technology Act 2000, and incorporates terms such as semiconductor memory and communication device.
• Master mapping with earlier law: The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam contains 170 sections, 12 chapters, and 4 parts, replacing the earlier structure of IEA while largely preserving substantive legal principles.
• Renumbered provisions: Several provisions have been renumbered without changing their substance, including rules relating to res gestae, motive, conspiracy, expert opinion, burden of proof, privileges and examination of witnesses.

Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023 Significance

The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023 modernises evidence law by preserving established legal principles while strengthening the framework for handling digital and electronic evidence.

• Improved digital recognition: Explicit inclusion of emails, smartphones, websites, cloud records, electronic messages and server logs removes uncertainty regarding the legal status of digital documents.
• Greater procedural clarity: Clearer provisions relating to electronic records reduce dependence on lengthy judicial interpretation and provide better statutory guidance for courts and investigating agencies.
• Technology-compatible evidence: Synchronisation with the Information Technology Act 2000 improves consistency between evidence law and digital technology used in modern investigations.
• Remote participation: Electronic recording of oral evidence enables witnesses, victims and accused persons to participate through digital platforms, improving accessibility and procedural efficiency.

Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023 Challenges

The success of the new law under Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023 depends on secure handling of electronic evidence, adequate forensic capacity and effective procedural safeguards.

• Risk of electronic tampering: The Supreme Court recognised in 2014 that electronic records are vulnerable to manipulation, making strong safeguards essential before relying entirely on digital evidence during trials.
• Custody-related evidence: The Act retains the rule allowing discovery-based evidence obtained from persons in police custody, despite concerns expressed in judicial decisions and Law Commission reports regarding possible coercion.
• Unequal treatment of accused: Information leading to discovery remains admissible when obtained in police custody but not under similar circumstances outside custody, continuing an important distinction from the earlier law.
• Implementation capacity: Effective enforcement requires stronger cyber laboratories, trained forensic personnel, awareness of encryption methods and adequate digital infrastructure to handle the growing volume of electronic evidence under the new law.

Way Forward:

• Need for secure chain of custody: The Standing Committee on Home Affairs (2023) recommended mandatory protection of authenticity and integrity through proper chain-of-custody procedures for all electronic and digital evidence.
• Forensic safeguards: The Karnataka High Court guidelines (2021) recommend qualified forensic experts during searches, prohibit investigators from operating seized devices and require storage media to be secured in Faraday bags.
• International best practices: The European Union Draft Directive Proposal emphasises admissibility only where electronic evidence is protected from manipulation and allows involvement of IT experts whenever required.
• Law Commission recommendations: The Law Commission (2003) suggested excluding evidence obtained through threat, coercion or torture, treating discoveries equally inside and outside police custody, and strengthening accountability for custodial injuries.
• Malimath Committee recommendations: The Malimath Committee (2003) proposed reforms including social welfare offences, a mixed criminal justice model, revised evidentiary standards and admissibility of confessions before senior police officers.