Oral admissions as to the contents of electronic records are not relevant, unless the genuineness of the electronic record produced is in question.
Simplified Explanation
Section 22A of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 was introduced to address the relevance of oral admissions concerning the contents of electronic records. This section specifically deals with the conditions under which oral statements about electronic records can be considered relevant and admissible in legal proceedings.
Explanation:
- General Rule:
- Similar to Section 22, which deals with documents, Section 22A generally states that oral admissions about the contents of electronic records (like emails, digital files, or databases) are not relevant as evidence. The rationale is that the electronic record itself should be produced as the best evidence of its contents.
- Exception:
- Genuineness of the Electronic Record in Question: The exception to this rule arises when the authenticity of the electronic record is disputed. If there is a question about whether the electronic record is genuine—whether it has been tampered with, altered, or is a forgery—then oral admissions related to its contents can become relevant. For example, if someone admits orally that the electronic record is not authentic or was modified, this admission would be relevant in determining the genuineness of the record.
Example:
Imagine a situation where A emails B a contract, and later B claims that the email has been altered or that the electronic contract is not genuine.
- Fact in Issue: Whether the electronic contract sent via email is genuine.
- General Rule: If B orally admits to C that “the email A sent me says I owe ₹10,000,” this oral statement would not normally be admissible in court. The court would require the actual email or a certified electronic copy as the primary evidence of the contract’s contents.
- Exception for Genuineness: However, if B disputes the authenticity of the email and orally admits to C, “I altered the contract after receiving it from A,” this oral admission would become relevant. The court could consider this admission when determining whether the electronic record (the email) is genuine or has been tampered with.
Significance:
Section 22A is significant in the context of the digital age, where electronic records play a crucial role in legal proceedings. It reinforces the principle that the best evidence of the contents of an electronic record is the record itself. By limiting the admissibility of oral admissions concerning electronic records, the section helps maintain the integrity and reliability of electronic evidence. However, it also provides an important exception for cases where the genuineness of the electronic record is in question, allowing the court to consider oral statements that might reveal whether the record has been altered or forged. This helps ensure that justice is served in cases involving electronic evidence.
