Journal of Academic Research for Humanities (JARH) is a double-blind, peer-reviewed, Open Free Access, online Multidisciplinary Research Journal
Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Vol. 5 No. 2 (2025)
The International "Journal of Academic Research for Humanities"

Research Articles

Digital evidence in South Asia: a comparative legal study of Pakistan, India, and Bangladesh

Published 30-06-2025

  • Mubashir Hassan
    • ,
  • Abdullah Munawar
    • ,
  • Fareed Ahmed
    • ,
  • Ibrar Hameed
    • ,
  • Waseem Akram

Mubashir Hassan
Student, Department of Law, Hazara University Mansehra, Pakistan

Abdullah Munawar
Student, Department of Law, Hazara University Mansehra, Pakistan

Fareed Ahmed
Student, Department of Law, Hazara University Mansehra, Pakistan.

Ibrar Hameed
Student, Department of Law, Hazara University Mansehra, Pakistan,

Waseem Akram
Student, Gillani Law College, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan, Pakistan,

Abstract

The dawn of the notion of digital evidence has raised new feuds of admissibility and reliability of evidence in the legal realm, due to their fragility, manipulation risks, and compatibility with traditional evidence rules. This study comparatively analyses the legal approaches of the three South Asian countries - Pakistan, India, and Bangladesh - in addressing the challenge of digital evidence admissibility. Despite the common evidentiary legal framework origin, each of them governs the admissibility of digital evidence with a distinct legislative framework. Pakistan introduced the Electronic Transactions Ordinance 2002 earlier and now deals with it via the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA) 2016. Similarly, India amended the Evidence Act 1872 by inserting Sections 65A & 65B via the Information Technology Act 2000. Bangladesh has also been trying to come up with a challenge through the Information and Communication Technology Act 2006 and the Digital Security Act 2018. This study, on the one hand, examines important convergences between these countries’ legal frameworks, such as difficulties with technical complexity, certification requirements, and lack of judicial capacity, by using qualitative legal analysis of statutes, landmark court decisions, and other secondary data. On the other hand, divergences between these legal frameworks have also been highlighted, which are mainly structural and methodological in nature. The findings highlight a common need for ongoing legislative reforms, enhanced forensic infrastructure, and specialized judicial training, so that it could harmonize legal standards not only in South Asia but also across the globe.

Keywords

Digital Evidence, Admissibility. , Section 65B. , PECA. DSA.

PDF

References

  1. Abbasi, H. &. (2020). Admissibility of Electronic Evidence in Islamic Law and US Law-Need for a New Corroboration Theory. MEI, 19(1).
  2. Abbasi, H. R. (2021). Critical Analysis of Pakistani Law of Electronic Evidence from the Perspective of Sharīʻah and English Law-Recommendations for Pakistan, Tahdhib-al-Afkar, 33-50
  3. Ali, B. G. (2018). Digital evidence–an approach to safeguard from cybercrime in Bangladesh. NDC E-JOURNAL, 17(1), 23-41.
  4. Angel, O. M. (2024). Digital evidence as a means of proof in criminal proceedings. Revista de Gestão Social e Ambiental,, 18(4), 04585-04585.
  5. Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer & Ors., 10 473. (SCC 2014).
  6. Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal. (2020). Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal, (2020) 7 1. (7), 1. SCC.
  7. Barua, A. E. (2022). Digital Evidence and Its Character as the Best Evidence Rule in the Law of Evidence in Bangladesh. Doctoral dissertation, East West University.
  8. Bharati, R. K. (2024). Forensic Bytes: Admissibility and Challenges of Digital Evidence in Legal Proceedings. Int J Sci Res Sci & Technol, 11(16), 24-35.
  9. Casey, E. (2011). Digital evidence and computer crime: Forensic science, computers, and the internet. Academic Press.
  10. Digital Security Act (DSA) (2018 ).
  11. Dubey, V. (2017). Admissibility of electronic evidence: an Indian perspective. Forensic Research and Criminology International Journal, 4(2), 58-63.
  12. Information and Communication Technology Act. (2006 ).
  13. Ishtiaq Ahmed Mirza v. Federation of Pakistan. (2019). PLD SC 675.
  14. Khaleda Akhtar V. State, 37 (HCD 1985).
  15. Khan, M. A. (2024). Digital Evidence, Surveillance Technology and Cybercrime: Analyzing the Impact on Criminal Law Policies in Bangladesh. Department of Law and Justice.
  16. Khan, M. S. (2023). Digital Evidence and Pakistani Criminal Justice System: A Review Article. Journal of Social Sciences Review, 3(1), 489-498.
  17. Khudhair, N. S. (2021). Revisiting the admissibility of electronic evidence: Indian jurisdictions and notes from other countries. Psychology and Education, 58(5), 1135-1148.
  18. Obamanu, G. V. (2023). Legal issues and challenges in the admissibility of digital forensic evidence in courts in Nigeria. AJIEEL, 8(01), 96-109.
  19. Order, Q.-e.-S. (1984).
  20. Reith, M. C. (2002). An examination of digital forensic models. International Journal of Digital Evidence, 1(3), 1-12.
  21. Saddique, A. A. (2024). Role of Forensic Evidence in the Criminal Trials: A Legal Analysis from a Pakistan Perspective. Research Journal of Psychology, 2(3), 261-278.
  22. Saeed, A. A. (2022). APPROACH OF PAKISTANI COURTS REGARDING ADMISSIBILITY OF MODERN DEVICES OR TECHNIQUES IN EVIDENCE. Pakistan Journal of International Affairs, 5(3).
  23. Salman Akram Raja v. Government of Punjab, 203 (SCMR 2013).
  24. Shafhi Mohammad v. State of Himachal Pradesh. (2018). 2, 801. SCC.
  25. State of Maharashtra v. Dr. Praful B. Desai. (2003). SCC 601.
  26. State v. Navjot Sandhu, 11 SCC 600. (NCT of Delhi 2005).
  27. Tanbir, K. (2021). Admissibility of Digital Evidence in Bangladesh. SSRN 4274024.
  28. The Electronic Transactions Ordinance (ETO). (2002).
  29. Usman, M. (2022). DIGITAL EVIDENCE: TESTIMONY OF EXPERT WITNESS in Pakistani Law. Majallah-e-Talim o Tahqiq, 4(1).
  30. Vedwal, A. (2023). Admissibility of digital evidence for cybercrime investigation. SSRN 4443356.
  31. Yasir Ayyaz and others v The State, 366 (LHR 2019).
  32. Zahoor, R. A. (2022). Digital Evidence and Its Admissibility under Pakistani Law. Journal of Development and Social Sciences, 3(4), 51-60.