Question

Which of the following is not stated in Section 63(4) of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, with regard to a certificate to verify the authenticity of electronic evidence?

• A. Signed by both the person in charge of the computer or communication device and an expert, with the certificate adhering to the format prescribed in the Adhiniyam's Schedule.
• B. Qualification of an expert.
• C. The form specified in the Schedule requires that electronic evidence be accompanied by a 'hash value'.
• D. None of the above

Hint:

The BSA 2023 raises the bar for electronic evidence! Always check for the "Hash Value" and the mandatory "Expert signature" to ensure compliance with the new Schedule.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is D

Section 63(4) and its Schedule can be tested by checking each of the three specific features one at a time, and then seeing whether anything is left over as "not stated."

Checking feature one:
The dual signature of the person in charge of the device and an expert, in the Schedule's prescribed format, is written into the certification requirement, so it is present.

Checking feature two:
The expert's qualification is called for as part of establishing the reliability of the certificate, so it too is present.

Checking feature three:
The hash value requirement is one of the technical details the prescribed Schedule form calls for, so it is present as well.

Conclusion:
Since every one of the three specific features checks out as genuinely part of Section 63(4), there is no remaining feature that qualifies as "not stated," which leaves the residual option as the only correct choice.

\[ \boxed{\text{None of the above}} \]

Answer 2

Section 63(4) was drafted to tighten up how electronic evidence gets authenticated, closing gaps that existed under the older law by demanding more detail and more accountability in the certificate. Testing each option against that tightening purpose shows why none of them describes something left out.

1. Dual signature and prescribed Schedule format: Requiring both the custodian of the device and an independent expert to sign, in a fixed format, serves the purpose of making the certificate more reliable and harder to fabricate.
2. Qualification of an expert: Demanding proof of the expert's qualification ensures that the person vouching for the electronic evidence actually has the competence to do so.
3. Hash value requirement: A hash value lets anyone verify that the electronic evidence has not been altered, which is precisely the kind of technical safeguard the tightened regime was meant to add.
4. None of the above: Since all three features directly serve the strengthening purpose behind Section 63(4), and each is genuinely part of the certification scheme, there is nothing among them that the provision fails to state.

Because every listed feature actually advances the provision's purpose of stronger, more reliable certification, none of them can be the one that is missing.

Therefore, the correct answer is None of the above.