Indian Evidence Law | Updated 20 October 2026

Section 88A Evidence Act: Presumption as to Electronic Messages

Section 88A of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 dealt with a limited presumption concerning electronic messages sent through email servers. The corresponding provision under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA) is Section 90.

Current legal position: The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 came into force on 1 July 2024, replacing the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, subject to its repeal and savings provisions. Section 90 BSA governs the presumption about electronic messages for proceedings to which the new law applies.

Section 88A of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872

The former provision, inserted by the Information Technology Act, 2000 with effect from 17 October 2000, stated:

Presumption as to electronic messages. The Court may presume that an electronic message, forwarded by the originator through an electronic mail server to the addressee to whom the message purports to be addressed, corresponds with the message as fed into his computer for transmission; but the Court shall not make any presumption as to the person by whom such message was sent.

Explanation. The expressions "addressee" and "originator" have the meanings assigned in Section 2(1)(b) and Section 2(1)(za), respectively, of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

Section 90 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023

Section 90 carries forward the limited presumption concerning electronic messages. A court may presume that an electronic message forwarded by an originator through an electronic mail server to the intended addressee corresponds with the message fed into the computer for transmission. The provision does not permit a presumption identifying the person who sent the message.

The statutory explanation uses the meanings of "addressee" and "originator" in the Information Technology Act, 2000. Consult the official BSA text for the exact current wording and any applicable amendments.

Meaning and scope of the presumption

What does "may presume" mean?

Under the law of evidence, "may presume" gives the court discretion: it may treat a fact as proved unless disproved, or require proof of it. It is not a mandatory or conclusive presumption.

What may the court presume?

The limited inference concerns correspondence between the message supplied for transmission and the electronic message forwarded through the email system. The presumption is not a blanket guarantee of accuracy, authenticity or lawful authorship.

What is not presumed?

The identity of the person who actually sent the email is not presumed merely from the sender address, display name, email header or account ownership. Independent evidence may be needed to establish authorship, control of an account or attribution.

Relevant statutory definitions

Originator: Under Section 2(1)(za) of the Information Technology Act, 2000, a person who sends, generates, stores or transmits an electronic message, or causes it to be sent, generated, stored or transmitted to another person, excluding an intermediary.

Addressee: Under Section 2(1)(b) of the Information Technology Act, 2000, a person intended by the originator to receive an electronic record, excluding an intermediary.

Electronic record: Section 2(1)(t) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 defines the term broadly to include data, records or data generated, images or sounds stored, received or sent in electronic form or microfilm or computer-generated microfiche.

Proving an email or electronic message in court

Preserve the original: retain the email in its native format, with full headers, timestamps and attachments where available.
Show attribution: use corroborating communications, admissions, account access records or other reliable evidence to connect the message to a person.
Meet admissibility rules: where applicable, comply with Section 63 BSA concerning electronic or digital records and the prescribed certificate requirements.
Address disputes: evidence of spoofing, compromised accounts, altered records or unreliable systems may affect weight and proof.

Example: An email appears to have come from a company director. Section 90 may assist in assessing correspondence of a message transmitted through the email system, but it does not, by itself, establish that the director personally sent or authorised the email.

Section 90 and other electronic evidence provisions

Section 90 addresses a particular presumption about electronic messages. It should be read separately from the provisions governing admissibility of electronic records, electronic signatures and secure electronic records. A document being admissible does not automatically establish who authored it or whether its contents are true.

Official legislation and references

Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 - official India Code PDF (see Sections 90, 63 and 170).
India Code - official central legislation database (Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and Information Technology Act, 2000).
Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology - information technology law and policy.

This article provides general legal information; the applicable procedural and evidentiary rules depend on the proceedings and relevant commencement and savings provisions.