The operational framework of criminal investigations and trials in India is undergoing a structural transformation due to rapid advances in consumer electronics, cloud storage, encrypted communications, algorithmic databases, and artificial intelligence. Investigating agencies increasingly rely on data drawn from remote servers, mobile devices, transient messaging platforms, automated forensic systems, and synthetic-media environments to reconstruct criminal conduct. This paper undertakes a doctrinal and constitutional critique of the statutory framework governing electronic evidence under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA), particularly the admissibility regime created by Section 63 and the certificate mechanism under Section 63(4). It argues that the BSA modernizes Indian evidence law by placing electronic records within the mainstream of documentary proof and by introducing clearer distinctions between primary and secondary electronic evidence. However, the paper also finds that the dual-certification model, while improving reliability through custodian and expert validation, may create practical burdens for police agencies and forensic laboratories unless supported by adequate infrastructure and standardized procedures. The analysis further examines the evidentiary risks posed by artificial intelligence, deepfakes, opaque forensic software, and machine-generated outputs. It contends that metadata verification and hash-value integrity, though essential, are insufficient where synthetic media is created as an original digital file. In such cases, courts must demand deeper forensic scrutiny, source-code accountability, error-rate disclosure, and algorithmic transparency. The paper concludes that Article 21’s guarantee of fair trial and due process requires a right to meaningful challenge against automated or AI-assisted evidence, ensuring that technological efficiency does not override constitutional safeguards in Indian criminal trials.