BSA vs IEA — Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023 Compared to Indian Evidence Act 1872
The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023 replaced the Indian Evidence Act 1872 on 1 July 2024. The doctrinal foundation is preserved; the key change is the explicit textual recognition of electronic and digital records as primary evidence.
| Topic | IEA 1872 (repealed) | BSA 2023 (in force) |
|---|---|---|
| Effective Date | In force since 1 September 1872 | Came into force 1 July 2024 |
| Total Sections | 167 sections | 170 sections |
| Definition of "Evidence" | Section 3 — oral + documentary | Section 2(1)(e) — adds electronic + digital records |
| Primary Evidence | Section 62 | Section 57 — recognises electronic record as primary evidence |
| Secondary Evidence | Section 63 | Section 58 |
| Electronic Records (Admissibility) | Section 65B — introduced via IT Act 2000 | Section 63 — substantially carried forward, certification requirement clarified |
| Expert Opinion | Section 45 — handwriting, fingerprint, science | Section 39 — expanded to include digital forensics |
| Burden of Proof | Section 101 | Section 104 |
| Presumption of Dishonour (Cheques) | No specific presumption | Continues Section 139 NI Act framework (separate Act) |
| Hearsay (Dying Declaration) | Section 32 | Section 26 — language modernised, scope unchanged |
| Witness Examination | Section 135–166 | Section 137–168 |
| Confession by Police | Section 25–26 — inadmissible | Section 22–23 — same rule continues |
| Confession Recorded by Magistrate | Section 26 (read with 164 CrPC) | Section 23 (read with 183 BNSS) |
| Presumption — Document 30 Years Old | Section 90 | Section 92 |
| Estoppel | Section 115 | Section 121 — unchanged in substance |
Frequently Asked Questions
When did the BSA replace the Indian Evidence Act?
The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023 came into force on 1 July 2024, replacing the Indian Evidence Act 1872. Cases registered before 1 July 2024 continue under the IEA; cases registered on or after that date follow the BSA.
Is Section 65B IEA the same as Section 63 BSA?
Substantively yes. Section 63 BSA carries forward the framework for admissibility of electronic records that was contained in Section 65B IEA. The certification requirement remains, and the seminal judgment in Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer (2014) 10 SCC 473 (and the clarification in Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal, 2020 SCC OnLine SC 571) continue to govern.
Does the BSA recognise digital evidence differently?
Yes — Section 57 BSA expressly recognises electronic and digital records as primary evidence (subject to certification). The IEA had to be interpreted broadly to cover digital records; the BSA now provides explicit textual recognition.
Is the rule against police-recorded confessions unchanged?
Yes. Sections 22 and 23 BSA preserve the IEA bar on confessions made to police officers being inadmissible. The protections introduced after Nandini Satpathy v. P.L. Dani (1978) and refined since remain in place.
How is the IEA-to-BSA transition handled?
Section 170 BSA preserves the IEA for cases registered before 1 July 2024. For pending trials, the procedural framework — examination, cross-examination, presumption — is determined by the Act in force when the trial commenced.
For evidentiary disputes spanning the IEA-to-BSA transition — particularly Section 63 BSA / Section 65B IEA electronic records certification — contact Unified Chambers and Associates at legal@unifiedchambers.com or +91 84008 60008.