Compliance with statutory evidence requirements is essential for admissibility in proceedings.

Heard Mr. K. B. Pradeep, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Bindu R. Sasthamangalam, learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioners fairly concedes that the pen drive, allegedly containing the recorded conversation between the landlords and tenants, does not conform to the requirements of Section 63 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam , 2023 ( BSA ), and seeks time to cure the defect so as to enable the said pen drive to be marked as an exhibit in the proceedings.

3. The learned counsel for the respondents/landlords has placed before us the chronology of events to demonstrate that the petitioners were absent on several occasions and were attempting to delay the proceedings.

4. The matter has been pending since 2021. The petitioners ought to have been diligent in ensuring compliance with the statutory requirements before seeking to produce the pen drive as evidence. The record also indicates that the petitioners have not been proceeding with due diligence.

₹

5. Upon payment of costs of 5,000/- to the respondent-landlords within one week from today, the petitioners are permitted to tender the pen drive as electronic evidence, subject to compliance with Section 63 of the BSA within a period of 10 days from today. In the event of failure to pay the costs within the stipulated time, the pen drive shall not be received as electronic evidence in the proceedings. The admissibility of electronic evidence need not be gone into at this stage.

6. Considering that the proceedings have already commenced, we request the Rent Control Court / Principal Munsiff Court–I, Kozhikode, to conclude the evidence of the parties as expeditiously as possible, subject to the convenience of the court.

7. The petition is accordingly disposed of.

Sd/-