The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA) represents a landmark legislative overhaul of India’s law of evidence, replacing the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, with a framework ostensibly calibrated for the digital age. This paper undertakes a systematic comparative analysis of the electronic evidence admissibility regime under the BSA vis-a-vis two of the most developed and influential frameworks globally: the United States Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE) and the European Union’s Regulation on Electronic Identification and Trust Services (eIDAS Regulation, 910/2014). Through doctrinal analysis and comparative legal methodology, the study scrutinises the conditions for admissibility, authentication standards, presumptive validity of electronic signatures, evidentiary weight accorded to electronic records, and cross-border recognition. The paper identifies three cardinal tensions. First, the BSA, despite reforms, continues to require rigid procedural certification (akin to the erstwhile Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872) without fully embracing the flexible, process-based authentication models of the FRE. Second, while the eIDAS Regulation establishes a graduated trust hierarchy for electronic signatures with automatic evidentiary presumptions, neither the BSA nor the FRE has crafted a comparable statutory presumption of authenticity. Third, the cross-border recognition gap under the BSA remains acute when compared to the mandatory mutual recognition regime within the EU under eIDAS. The paper concludes with concrete suggestions for legislative reform, including adoption of a graduated authentication standard under the BSA, establishment of a statutory presumption for certified electronic records, and India’s accession to multilateral digital evidence treaties, to align India’s evidentiary framework with international best practices.