Section 65B Certificate Format PDF Free Download (2026)
Written and analysed by Vaibhav Ojha
Head Of Legal CommunicationsNEW DELHI: A WhatsApp chat may expose a false allegation, but can a court reject it because of a missing certificate? Download the free Section 65B PDF format and understand what India's latest electronic evidence law requires.
A husband may have WhatsApp messages contradicting allegations of dowry harassment. A father may possess recordings relevant to a child custody dispute. An accused person may have call records supporting his defence.
But possessing electronic evidence is not the same as proving it in court.
A screenshot, audio recording or email can become legally difficult to rely upon if the necessary electronic evidence certificate is missing or defective.
Under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, this certificate was governed by Section 65B(4). Following the implementation of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA), the corresponding provision is Section 63(4).
And there is an important difference.
The new law prescribes a certificate containing device particulars, hash values, a hash report and declarations involving an expert.
In 2026, the Supreme Court reinforced the importance of these safeguards in cases involving electronic records.
This guide explains the correct certificate format, when to use Section 65B or Section 63 BSA, who can sign the certificate, how to preserve WhatsApp chats, and what Supreme Court judgments actually say.
Section 65B certificate format PDF — free download
You can access both electronic evidence certificate formats below.
Download Section 65B Indian Evidence Act Certificate Format PDF — Free
For matters governed by the new law:
Download Section 63 BSA Certificate Format PDF — Part A and Part B
Important: Section 65B of the old Evidence Act did not prescribe one fixed certificate layout. The new Section 63 BSA certificate, however, has a prescribed Schedule.
Read Also:- Section 65B and Section 63 BSA Certificate: Format, Rules and Complete Legal Guide 2026
A template is only a starting point. Every statement must correspond to the actual device, data source and extraction process.
1. What is a Section 65B certificate under the Indian Evidence Act?
A Section 65B certificate is a document containing the statutory particulars needed to establish the admissibility of certain electronic records produced as computer outputs.
Examples include printed emails, exported WhatsApp chats, CCTV copies, call-detail records, audio files and video recordings.
Under Section 65B(4) of the Indian Evidence Act, the certificate must identify the electronic record, describe how it was produced, identify the relevant computer or device, address the conditions prescribed by law and bear the signature of a competent person responsible for the system or relevant activities.
The certificate helps the court understand where the electronic record came from and how the output was generated.
It does not, by itself, prove that every statement appearing in a WhatsApp chat or recording is true.
Authenticity, authorship, relevance and evidentiary weight may still be disputed.
2. Is Section 65B still applicable in India in 2026?
Yes, but its application is limited following the introduction of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam.
The BSA came into force on 1 July 2024.
Section 170 of the BSA repealed the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, but preserved the application of the old Act to applications, trials, inquiries, investigations, proceedings and appeals already pending immediately before commencement.
Read Also:- Divorce Decree Cannot Be Granted Merely Relying On WhatsApp Chat & SMS Messages: Bombay High Court Sets Aside Family Court Order
Therefore, Section 65B remains relevant to matters covered by this savings provision.
For proceedings governed by the new BSA, the corresponding provision is Section 63.
| Legal requirement | Section 65B, Evidence Act | Section 63, BSA |
|---|---|---|
| Statute | Indian Evidence Act, 1872 | Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 |
| Application | Matters protected by the savings provision | Proceedings governed by the new Act |
| Certificate format | No fixed statutory form | Prescribed Schedule |
| Device details | Required as applicable | Specific identification fields |
| Hash-value declaration | Not expressly prescribed | Provided in the Schedule |
| Hash report | Not expressly mandatory under Section 65B | Required by the Schedule |
| Expert declaration | No separate prescribed Part B | Expert declaration under Part B |
Do not choose the certificate merely because a WhatsApp message was sent before or after 1 July 2024.
The legal status and timing of the relevant proceeding must be examined.
Read the official Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, including Sections 63 and 170.
3. Section 65B certificate format for WhatsApp chats, emails and recordings
For matters governed by the old Evidence Act, a practical certificate should include the following particulars.
Specimen Section 65B certificate
CERTIFICATE UNDER SECTION 65B(4) OF THE INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872
Before the Court: [Court name]
Case title: [Petitioner versus Respondent]
Case number: [Number]
I, [Full Name], son/daughter/spouse of [Name], residing at [Address], state and certify as follows:
- I am responsible for the operation of, or the relevant activities involving, the electronic device or computer system described in this certificate.
- The electronic record being produced consists of [describe the WhatsApp chats, emails, audio recordings, video files, CCTV footage or other electronic records].
- The record was produced from [device description, make, model and relevant identifying particulars].
- The device or computer was regularly used to store or process information for activities regularly carried on by a person having lawful control over it.
- Information of the relevant kind was regularly fed into the device or computer in the ordinary course of those activities.
- During the relevant period, the device or computer was operating properly, or any malfunction did not affect the electronic record or the accuracy of its contents.
- The information contained in the output reproduces or is derived from information fed into the device or computer in the ordinary course of those activities.
- The electronic output was prepared in the following manner: [describe the date, method, software and process of extraction, copying or printing].
- The statements made in this certificate are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Place: [Place]
Date: [Date]
Name and designation: [Name]
Signature: [Signature]
This is an adaptable specimen. Its wording must be checked against the applicable statutory requirements and the actual circumstances of production.
Download the printable Section 65B certificate format
4. Section 63 BSA certificate format: what changed under the new law?
Section 63(4) BSA requires a certificate identifying the electronic record and explaining the manner in which it was produced.
The certificate must also furnish relevant device particulars and address the statutory conditions concerning the generation and functioning of the electronic system.
The Schedule prescribes two parts.
Part A — to be filled by the party
This includes the identity of the person making the declaration, the source device, relevant identification particulars, the statutory declaration concerning lawful control and regular operation, and the hash value.
Part B — to be filled by the expert
This records the expert's identity, relevant source particulars, hash value, hashing algorithm and signed declaration.
Both parts provide for dates, times and place of execution.
The statutory form specifically mentions SHA-1, SHA-256, MD5 and other legally acceptable algorithms. SHA-256 is generally a sensible modern choice for integrity verification, although the Schedule does not mandate its exclusive use.
A hash report must accompany the certificate.
The certificate is required at each instance where the electronic record is submitted for admission under Section 63(4).
Download Section 63 BSA certificate format PDF
5. Supreme Court in 2026: are hash values and expert certificates necessary?
In Pune Bar Association v. Union of India, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 599 of 2026, decided on 22 May 2026, the Supreme Court examined a challenge to the requirements under Section 63(4) BSA.
The petitioner argued that requiring a hash value in Part A and expert certification in Part B imposed an unreasonable burden on ordinary litigants.
The matter was heard by a Bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vipul M. Pancholi.
The Court rejected the argument that these safeguards lacked a rational connection with the purpose of the legislation.
Referring to the importance of hash values, the Supreme Court described them as an "electronic fingerprint".
The Court explained that electronic records can be modified and manipulated, particularly with evolving technology, including artificial intelligence and deepfakes.
It also recognised that expert certification adds another safeguard to the process.
However, a second important legal question arose.
Must the Part B expert always be a government-notified Examiner of Electronic Evidence under Section 79A of the Information Technology Act?
The Court observed that Section 39 BSA could permit a broader understanding of expert evidence. It clarified that the Madras High Court's restrictive conclusion would not operate as a binding precedent.
The Supreme Court expressly kept the broader legal question open. Therefore, this decision should not be represented as an unrestricted approval allowing any technically knowledgeable individual to sign Part B.
For court filing, the expert's qualifications, technical experience, methods and credibility remain important.
Read the Section 63 BSA analysis and certificate guide on ShoneeKapoor.com.
6. Supreme Court judgment: man acquitted after uncertified call records were rejected
One of the most important recent decisions is Pooranmal v. State of Rajasthan, 2026 INSC 217, decided on 10 March 2026.
The appellant had been convicted in a murder case, and the prosecution relied partly upon call-detail records to connect him with another accused.
A three-judge Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and N.V. Anjaria examined whether the electronic evidence had been properly proved.
The prosecution argued that telecom personnel had been examined and that the absence of the requisite certificate should not be fatal.
The Court disagreed.
In paragraph 52, the Supreme Court held that the uncertified call-detail records could not be relied upon because the required Section 65B certificate had not been proved.
The Court ultimately acquitted Pooranmal after finding that the prosecution failed to establish a complete chain of incriminating circumstances.
The acquittal was not based solely on a missing certificate; the remaining circumstantial evidence was also insufficient.
The lesson is clear: serious criminal allegations cannot replace the legal requirements for proving electronic records.
Read the original Supreme Court judgment — Pooranmal v. State of Rajasthan, PDF.
7. Can a police officer issue a Section 65B certificate for telecom records?
The Supreme Court examined this issue in State of Tamil Nadu v. Ponnusamy, 2026 INSC 507, decided on 19 May 2026.
In that case, call-detail records had been sent by telecom companies to a police officer by email.
The police officer printed those records and produced them along with his own Section 65B certificate.
The Supreme Court found that this did not adequately prove the telecom operators' underlying electronic records.
The officer could certify his own receipt and printing process, but he was not the person responsible for generating the original call-detail records maintained by the telecom companies.
The necessary source evidence, emails and chain of custody had not been adequately established.
The Court agreed that the call-detail records had not been properly proved. However, that defect did not change the ultimate outcome because other evidence supported the relevant findings.
The practical distinction is important. A person may certify a process within their own knowledge and control. That does not automatically make them competent to certify another organisation's original system.
The same principle is relevant when electronic evidence passes through lawyers, investigators, cloud services, offices and third-party custodians.
8. Arjun Panditrao Khotkar judgment: is the Section 65B certificate mandatory?
In Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal, (2020) 7 SCC 1, decided on 14 July 2020, a three-judge Supreme Court Bench reaffirmed the mandatory character of Section 65B certification for secondary electronic evidence.
The Bench consisted of Justices R.F. Nariman, S. Ravindra Bhat and V. Ramasubramanian.
The judgment clarified the legal position following Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer, (2014) 10 SCC 473, and overruled the inconsistent relaxation adopted in Shafhi Mohammad v. State of Himachal Pradesh, (2018) 2 SCC 801.
The Court also explained an important distinction between proving an original electronic record directly and producing a copied computer output.
In appropriate circumstances, the owner or operator of the original device may prove the original record through direct testimony without a Section 65B certificate under the old Evidence Act.
This does not mean that merely carrying a mobile phone into court automatically proves the genuineness of screenshots, their authorship or their contents.
The Supreme Court further recognised that courts could permit or facilitate the production of a proper certificate during trial in suitable circumstances.
Read Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer — detailed judgment on ShoneeKapoor.com.
9. Is a Section 65B certificate compulsory in every divorce or matrimonial case?
This question needs careful treatment because the Family Courts Act, 1984 contains a special evidentiary provision.
Section 14 of the Family Courts Act permits a Family Court to receive material that may assist it in effectively resolving a dispute, even where the material would otherwise face objections under the ordinary law of evidence.
In L.P. v. R.D., First Appeal No. 866 of 2021, decided on 11 November 2025, the Madhya Pradesh High Court considered photographs relied upon by a husband in divorce proceedings.
The wife challenged the reliance on these photographs because no Section 65B certificate had been submitted.
Her counsel cited the Supreme Court's Arjun Panditrao Khotkar judgment.
However, the Division Bench comprising Justices Vishal Dhagat and B.P. Sharma distinguished the Supreme Court ruling in the context of Section 14 of the Family Courts Act.
The High Court upheld the divorce decree after considering the wider evidentiary powers of Family Courts and the particular material on record.
This does not establish that electronic evidence certificates are unnecessary in every matrimonial dispute or proceeding.
The applicable forum, statutory framework, nature of the evidence, admissibility objections and reliability of the material must all be considered.
The safer course is to preserve the original record and obtain the proper certificate wherever applicable, instead of depending entirely on a possible evidentiary relaxation.
Read the detailed Madhya Pradesh High Court coverage.
Download the High Court judgment PDF — 2025:MPHC-JBP:56736.
10. How husbands can preserve WhatsApp chats as evidence in matrimonial disputes
A WhatsApp conversation may be relevant to allegations under Section 498A IPC, corresponding BNS cruelty provisions, domestic violence disputes, maintenance, custody or allegations involving the breakdown of a relationship.
But the collection method matters.
Preserve the original phone and account. Avoid deleting messages, resetting the device or altering the original chat database.
Export the relevant conversation carefully. Retain dates, timestamps, attached media and surrounding messages necessary to understand the complete exchange.
Preserve the unedited evidence. Cropped screenshots may be challenged because they do not show the full context.
Identify the source. Record the device model, relevant account details and the method by which the electronic output was created.
Create an integrity record. Where applicable, calculate the hash value and preserve the corresponding report. Maintain a record of copying and transfers.
Obtain the legally appropriate certificate. Use Section 65B or Section 63 BSA according to the law applicable to the proceeding.
Read Also:- 65B Certificate for Audio – Video Recordings
Never create, edit or selectively manipulate digital material to support a defence.
A certificate does not cure fabrication or make an unlawful method of evidence collection lawful.
For men facing disputed matrimonial allegations, preservation of genuine contemporaneous evidence is often more useful than arguments based purely on accusations or counter-accusations.
11. Common mistakes while preparing electronic evidence certificates
Many certificate defects are preventable.
These include:
- Filing the old Section 65B format in a matter governed by Section 63 BSA without meeting the new requirements.
- Failing to identify the source device or account.
- Submitting incomplete or selectively cropped evidence without preserving the underlying record.
- Missing the hash-value declaration or hash report under the new Schedule.
- Obtaining signatures from persons who lack actual knowledge or responsibility concerning the source system.
- Treating Part B as a formality rather than an expert declaration.
- Submitting only a transcript without properly proving the recording.
- Assuming that a certificate conclusively proves who sent a message.
- Failing to record when and how digital evidence was copied, exported or transferred.
When a certificate cannot be obtained from a telecom operator, CCTV custodian, company or another third party, the appropriate procedural course should be considered promptly with counsel.
A court may permit later production in certain circumstances, but this cannot be treated as an automatic entitlement.
12. Court filing checklist for Section 65B and Section 63 BSA
Before relying upon electronic evidence, confirm that the following are ready:
- The correct applicable statutory provision and certificate.
- The original source device or preserved source record.
- A clear exhibit list identifying each electronic record.
- Details of the device, account or system.
- An accurate description of the copying or extraction process.
- The required signature from a competent person.
- A hash report and expert declaration wherever required.
- Records establishing chain of custody.
- Supporting witnesses and contextual evidence where necessary.
- Proper submission in accordance with the court's procedure and directions.
A properly prepared certificate improves the evidentiary foundation. It does not eliminate every possible objection.
My conclusion: Preserve the evidence before you need it
Over the years, I have repeatedly emphasised that men's legal defence must be built on documents, records, timelines and evidence rather than assumptions.
A false allegation can cause serious consequences. But even genuine material supporting a defence may become difficult to rely upon if it is not preserved and presented properly.
The lesson from the Supreme Court's electronic-evidence jurisprudence is not that every missing certificate automatically destroys a case. It is that digital evidence has legal conditions which cannot simply be ignored.
A screenshot is not a legal strategy. A forwarded recording is not a substitute for proper proof.
If you are preserving WhatsApp conversations, emails, call records or CCTV footage for litigation, ensure that the record, source and certification process can withstand scrutiny.
Do not merely collect evidence. Preserve it in a form that can be defended in court.
FAQ’S
1. Is a Section 65B certificate valid in 2026?
Yes, for proceedings governed by the saved Indian Evidence Act. New BSA-governed matters generally require Section 63 compliance.
2. Can I download the Section 65B certificate format for free?
Yes. The free Section 65B PDF format is available for adaptation to the facts of your case.
3. Is a Section 65B certificate required for WhatsApp screenshots?
Ordinarily, copied WhatsApp evidence requires applicable electronic-evidence certification, subject to the law, mode of proof and forum.
4. Who signs the Section 63 BSA certificate?
Part A is completed by the relevant party or responsible person, while Part B requires an expert declaration.
5. Can electronic evidence be rejected without a certificate?
Yes, where statutory certification is required and the defect is not legally cured. The result depends on the proceeding and applicable law.
Legal disclaimer: This article is for general legal awareness. It does not replace legal advice, forensic examination or a court's directions. The prescribed statutory certificate and individual facts must be verified before filing.
Share Your Thoughts
Comments are moderated before publication.