§ SECTION 86 · BSA 2023 · CHAPTER V — DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE

Presumption as to electronic records and electronic signatures

Security earns trust. For a secure electronic record the Court presumes it is unaltered, and for a secure electronic signature that it was affixed with intent to sign — but for anything not secure, this section grants no presumption at all.

How to read Section 86

Secure gets the presumption; nothing else does.

(1) Secure record

Presumed not altered since it became secure.

(2)(a) Secure signature

Presumed affixed with intent to sign / approve.

(2)(b) The limit

Not secure → no presumption of authenticity / integrity.

The bare Act

The section in its own words — the two presumptions and the limiting clause.

Section 86 · verbatim

(1) In any proceeding involving a secure electronic record, the Court shall presume unless contrary is proved, that the secure electronic record has not been altered since the specific point of time to which the secure status relates.

(2) In any proceeding, involving secure electronic signature, the Court shall presume unless the contrary is proved that—

(a)the secure electronic signature is affixed by subscriber with the intention of signing or approving the electronic record;

In short: the law rewards security. Where a record qualifies as a secure electronic record, the Court presumes (unless the contrary is proved) that it has not been altered since it became secure — an integrity presumption. Where a signature is a secure electronic signature, the Court presumes it was affixed by the subscriber with the intention of signing or approving the record. But clause (b) draws a firm boundary: except for secure records and secure signatures, this section creates no presumption at all about the authenticity or integrity of an electronic record or signature. So ‘secure’ is the switch — turn it off, and you are back to ordinary proof.

→ This carries forward IEA 1872 § 85B — presumption as to secure electronic records and signatures.

Glossary

secure electronic record

An e-record that meets the law’s security standard — presumed unaltered.

secure electronic signature

An e-signature meeting the security standard — presumed intended.

altered

Changed since it became secure — the thing presumed not to have happened.

subscriber

The person in whose name the e-signature is issued / used.

authenticity & integrity

Genuineness and un-tampered-ness — not presumed for non-secure (b).

unless the contrary is proved

The presumption is rebuttable by evidence.

The picture

‘Secure’ is the switch.

The section, part by part

Two sub-sections — tap each. Every clause is shown in its own words with a plain meaning.

(1) Secure record(2) Secure signature

sub-section (1)A secure e-record is presumed unaltered

In one lineIn a case involving a secure electronic record, the Court shall presume — unless the contrary is proved — that it has not been altered since the moment it became secure.

(1) In any proceeding involving a secure electronic record,for a SECURE e-recordin a case involving a secure electronic record…

the Court shall presume unless contrary is proved,the Court SHALL presume (unless disproved)…the Court shall presume (unless the contrary is proved)…

that the secure electronic record has not been altered since the specific point of time to which the secure status relates.→ UNALTERED since it became secure…that it has not been altered since the point of time it became secure.

ExampleA record protected by a secure electronic method is presumed unaltered since it was secured — the party alleging tampering must prove it.

✗ Not thisThis integrity presumption is only for secure records (see (2)(b)). An ordinary e-record gets no such presumption of being unaltered.

sub-section (2)Secure signature intended — and the hard limit

In one lineFor a secure electronic signature the Court presumes it was affixed with intent to sign / approve (a). And clause (b) draws the line: outside secure records / signatures, this section gives no presumption of authenticity or integrity.

(2) In any proceeding, involving secure electronic signature, the Court shall presume unless the contrary is proved that–for a SECURE e-signature, presume:in a case involving a secure electronic signature, the Court shall presume (unless disproved) that:

(a) the secure electronic signature is affixed by subscriber with the intention of signing or approving the electronic record;(a) affixed WITH INTENT to sign / approvethe signature was affixed by the subscriber with the intention of signing or approving the record.

(b) except in the case of a secure electronic record or a secure electronic signature, nothing in this section shall create any presumption, relating to authenticity and integrity of the electronic record or any electronic signature.(b) NO presumption for NON-securebut — except for a secure record or signature — this section creates no presumption about the authenticity or integrity of an e-record or e-signature.

ExampleA secure digital signature is presumed made deliberately to approve the record; but a basic typed name or an unsecured e-mark gets no presumption of authenticity or integrity.

✗ Not this‘Secure’ is the switch. Clause (b) makes it explicit — for anything not secure, § 86 grants no presumption; you fall back on ordinary proof (§ 66 / § 73 / § 63).

Connected provisions

§ 85

Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 — Section 86: Presumption as to electronic records and electronic signatures

Presumption as to electronic records and electronic signatures

How to read Section 86

The bare Act

Glossary

The picture

The section, part by part

Connected provisions

Electronic agreements

Proof as to e-signature

Electronic records

Signature Certificates