Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023
Section 66
Proof as to electronic signature
Except in the case of a secure electronic signature, if the electronic signature of any subscriber is alleged to have been affixed to an electronic record, the fact that such electronic signature is the electronic signature of the subscriber must be proved.
Why this exists
As digital transactions and electronic records became common, the law needed rules for how courts treat electronic signatures. This provision (like its predecessor, Section 67 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872) ensures that ordinary electronic signatures are not simply assumed genuine — their authenticity must be established through evidence, protecting against fraud or forgery. Secure electronic signatures, which meet stricter technical standards under related law (such as the Information Technology Act, 2000), are treated differently because their reliability is already presumed by design.
How courts read it
Under the earlier, similarly worded Section 67 of the Evidence Act, courts held that the burden of proving an ordinary electronic or digital signature lies on the party asserting it belongs to a specific person, similar to how handwritten signatures must be proved. Courts have distinguished 'secure' signatures (meeting technical safeguards) from ordinary ones, noting that secure signatures enjoy a statutory presumption of authenticity, while ordinary ones do not.
Common misconceptions
- Myth: Any electronic signature is automatically trusted as genuine in court.
Fact: Only 'secure electronic signatures' meeting specific technical standards get automatic legal trust; ordinary electronic signatures must be proven to belong to the person claimed.