The Delhi High Court has issued a notice calling for responses from both the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) and the Central government. This action pertains to a public interest litigation (PIL) that requests free access to forensic experts for litigants who rely on legal aid and need to present electronic evidence in court. The PIL, titled Zeeshan Ekhlaque & Anr. v. National Legal Services Authority & Ors., aims to support individuals who face challenges in adhering to Section 63 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA), which mandates expert certification for electronic evidence.
Judicial Concerns and Directions
The Division Bench, comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia, recognized that individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds might struggle to meet these requirements. Such difficulties could potentially hinder their right to access justice. Consequently, the court has directed NALSA to explore a possible scheme to address these issues while also requesting the government’s input.
“We are of the prima facie opinion that if individuals from disadvantaged sections cannot produce evidence in compliance with Section 63 of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, it could infringe on their right to seek justice,” the court noted. The bench emphasized the need for NALSA to devise a solution and inform the court of potential remedies to the concerns raised in the PIL.
Origins of the PIL
The PIL was brought forth by advocates Zeeshan Ekhlaque and Aman Bhide. It seeks directives to establish a system that provides qualified forensic experts at no cost to individuals eligible for legal aid under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. This Act ensures free and competent legal services to those in the weaker segments of society.
Under Section 63(4) of the BSA, electronic evidence requires a certificate that adheres to specific criteria, which necessitates examination by a technical expert. The petitioners highlighted that those dependent on free legal aid often cannot afford such expertise. Initially, they approached NALSA in April 2026, proposing a mechanism, including a panel of forensic experts, to aid legal-aid beneficiaries.
More Read
Responses and Further Developments
The Delhi State Legal Services Authority (DSLSA) acknowledged that legal aid lawyers are capable of preparing the necessary certificates. However, they conceded that forensic assistance might be considered on a case-by-case basis. Following this, the petitioners filed a request under the Right to Information Act (RTI Act) to inquire about any existing mechanisms for such support.
In May, NALSA responded, confirming there was no provision for expert assistance in preparing Section 63 certificates for legal-aid beneficiaries. This prompted the petitioners to approach the High Court, arguing that they seek not just certificate drafting help but also technical expertise to assess the electronic record and devices.
The petitioners contend that without such assistance, those eligible for free legal aid are disadvantaged in comparison to litigants who can afford forensic experts. “Without institutional support, indigent and legally aided litigants are deprived of effectively presenting electronic evidence in court,” the plea stated. This situation undermines the constitutional promise of equal access to justice.
More Read
Advocate Imran Ahmed represents the petitioners in this case.
