Skip to main content

WhatsApp has no Evidentiary Value

 WhatsApp has no Evidentiary Value

 The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India on July 14, 2021, in A2Z Infraservices Ltd. Versus

Quippo Infrastructure Ltd. (Now Known As Viom Infra Ventures Ltd.) SLP(C) No. 8636/2021

played a significant part in yet again enlightening us on the question of the evidentiary value

of WhatsApp chats/conversations. The complexities arise as only the printouts of the

conversations may be presented in court, the nature of WhatsApp chats is largely secondary.

However, the Indian Evidence Act requires that any "electronic record" be presented in the

main form of evidence or that the document is proven by primary evidence before it may be

admitted as evidence. The Courts have time and again answered the question of whether

WhatsApp Chats have any evidentiary value or not and have emphasized and ruled that

WhatsApp chats cannot be used as evidence without a certificate under Section 65B of the

Evidence Act.

A bench of Hon’ble Mr. Chief Justice N V Ramana and Hon’ble Mr. Justice A S Bopanna

and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Hrishikesh Roy said,

"What is the evidential value of WhatsApp messages these days? Anything can be created and

deleted on social media these days. We don't attach any value to the WhatsApp messages."

"Prima facie we are not satisfied with the HC direction for depositing the money in an

escrow account. We are not considering the purported admission in WhatsApp messages. If it

is not late, then go before the arbitrator and parties would be bound by the arbitrator's

award."

Brief Facts  -

 In 2016, South Delhi Municipal Corporation and a consortium consisting of the

Respondents and another business entered into the Concession Agreement which

included the collection and transportation of waste items after they had gone through

a waste management process.

 In 2017, the Respondents entered into a Master Service Agreement with the appellant

to complete a portion of the project as a subcontractor. The parties and several other

entities, including Axis Bank Limited, entered into another arrangement called the

Escrow agreement in October, 2017. All funds received by the Respondents under the

Concession Agreement would be placed in an Escrow account with Axis Bank

serving as the Escrow Agent under this agreement.


 A2Z entered into a separate agreement with Quippo Infrastructure to complete a

portion of the contract work, and it was agreed that the money collected by A2Z

would be placed in an escrow account from which the parties would be paid.

 The Master Service contract with Quippo was canceled by A2Z in the year 2020. As a

result of the termination of the contract, Quippo Infrastructure moved an application

to the Calcutta High Court for the appointment of an arbitration panel to resolve the

issue arising from the dispute.

 The Calcutta High Court in Quippo Infrastructure Ltd vs A2Z Infraservices Ltd & Anr

relied on the WhatsApp communication dated March 19, 2020, wherein the

respondent A2Z allegedly admitted due payment of INR 8.18 crore to the Quippo

Infrastructure (now Viom Infra ventures). Further, the court also relied upon an e-mail

dated 2018 where the A2Z infrastructure has agreed to deposit the payments received

from South Delhi Municipal to an Escrow Account.

 The Calcutta High Court relying on the same ordered the Respondent A2Z

Infraservice to deposit the due payment in an escrow account transparently

overlooking the fact that the A2Z contended that that e-mail/WhatsApp was falsified

and manufactured and therefore should not be considered acceptable in court.

 Later Aggrieved by the order of the Calcutta High Court A2Z Infra decided to

challenge the order and moved an application to the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The

Hon’ble Supreme Court of India on July 14, 2021, ruled that the aforementioned

communications on the social media network WhatsApp have no evidentiary value

and that the source of such messages cannot be identified, particularly in commercial

partnerships regulated by agreements.

Conclusion

Despite the modern ubiquity of instant messaging and social media platforms, based on the

discussions on point of law and the cases that are coming before the Hon’ble Supreme Court

of India and several High Courts have reiterated on several occasions that WhatsApp chat

will have no evidentiary value whatsoever if the same is not accompanied by a Certificate

under Section 65B of Indian Evidence Act.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more