ALGORITHMIC EVIDENCE IN THE DOCK: EXAMINING THE ADMISSIBILITY OF AIGENERATED RECORDS UNDER THE BHARATIYA SAKSHYA ADHINIYAM, 2023 AND THE CASE FOR A DEDICATED NORMATIVE FRAMEWORK

Authors

  • Aniruddh Sachin Bajaj Author
    Competing Interests

    The authors declare that they have no competing financial, professional, institutional, or personal interests, relationships, or affiliations that could reasonably be perceived to have influenced the conduct of the research, the interpretation of the findings, or the preparation and publication of this manuscript.

  • Rishish Singh Author
    Competing Interests

    The authors declare that they have no competing financial, professional, institutional, or personal interests, relationships, or affiliations that could reasonably be perceived to have influenced the conduct of the research, the interpretation of the findings, or the preparation and publication of this manuscript.

Keywords:

AI-generated evidence, Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023, algorithmic

Abstract

What may a court lawfully treat as established fact, and how ought it arrive at that conclusion? These are old questions, but artificial intelligence has given them a sharper edge than they have had for some time. The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA) replaced the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 from 1 July 2024 - India's most significant reconfiguration of evidentiary law since the colonial period. Its reforms are real: electronic records are treated more coherently, expert evidence is better structured, and the certification regime is clarified. Yet the BSA was designed to answer a prior generation of problems. When Parliament enacted it, the governing concern was whether a stored or transmitted digital record had been altered in transit. Today's courts face something different: evidence that a machine did not merely store or convey but actively produced. A deepfake reconstructing a conversation, a recidivism score computed from demographic proxies, a DNA mixture resolved by probabilistic software - none of these maps cleanly onto the BSA's certification-based architecture. This article contends that the existing framework is both doctrinally inadequate and practically unworkable for this category of evidence. It draws on comparative law from the United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Union, together with scholarship in AI governance and legal epistemology, to develop a normative framework resting on three claims: that AI-generated evidence warrants a structured judicial reliability inquiry before admission; that Parliament must carve out a discrete statutory category with mandatory disclosure requirements; and that Articles 14, 20, and 21 of the Constitution place substantive limits on the judicial deployment of algorithmic outputs. The article closes with specific proposals for legislative amendment and practice directions.

Author Biographies

  • Aniruddh Sachin Bajaj

    2nd Year B.A.,LL.B(Hons.) student at Gujarat National Law University, Gandhinagar

  • Rishish Singh

    2nd Year B.A.,LL.B(Hons.) student at Gujarat National Law University, Gandhinagar

Downloads

Published

2026-06-30

How to Cite

ALGORITHMIC EVIDENCE IN THE DOCK: EXAMINING THE ADMISSIBILITY OF AIGENERATED RECORDS UNDER THE BHARATIYA SAKSHYA ADHINIYAM, 2023 AND THE CASE FOR A DEDICATED NORMATIVE FRAMEWORK. (2026). International Journal of Law, Culture & Society, 2(2). https://www.ijlcs.in/Journal/index.php/ijlcs/article/view/48

Similar Articles

1-10 of 27

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.