The Bombay High Court recently ruled that printed screenshots from Facebook cannot serve as definitive proof of a fake account. This judgment was delivered in a case where a petitioner sought to use Facebook screenshots to substantiate claims of impersonation. The court emphasized that without proper electronic certification or digital verification, such screenshots do not meet the evidentiary standards under the Indian Evidence Act.
Background:
The petitioner in this case alleged that a Facebook account, believed to be created by someone else, was impersonating them, and presented printouts of the account as evidence. However, the court underscored that under the Information Technology Act and Indian Evidence Act, electronic records must be authenticated for admissibility, which mere printouts fail to satisfy.
Court’s Rationale:
The court highlighted that while social media evidence can be pivotal in cases involving impersonation, it must adhere to legal standards for authenticity. For instance, Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act requires a certificate to verify the digital evidence, confirming its origin and legitimacy. In this instance, printouts without such certification were deemed inadequate for proving the account’s authenticity or its purportedly fake nature.
Existing Measures:
The ruling underscores the importance of proper digital documentation and certification for social media evidence. Indian law currently mandates that electronic records need to be backed by an authentication certificate, allowing the courts to verify their reliability. The case also brings attention to how authorities and litigants can better prepare electronic evidence to meet judicial requirements.
Conclusion:
The judgment by the Bombay High Court sends a clear message on the handling of digital evidence in legal cases. It encourages petitioners to seek verifiable digital records and emphasizes the need for proper evidence standards in the digital age. As technology increasingly intersects with the law, this ruling highlights the judiciary’s cautious approach in ensuring that only authenticated evidence is admitted in court.