The increasing prevalence of cybercrimes has clamoured a robust legal framework for the search, seizure, and admissibility of electronic evidence in India. The Information Technology (IT) Act, 2000, along with provisions under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (previously Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973), and the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (previously Indian Evidence Act, 1872), governs the legal parameters of digital evidence collection, preservation and unimpeachable chain of custody in investigation. However, various problems persist in leveraging law enforcement’s investigative powers coupled with the constitutional safeguards, particularly the Right to Privacy and the Right to a Fair Trial granted under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. This paper examines the legal framework governing search and seizure under the IT Act, 2000 and general provisions of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 as applicable, analysing the scope, limitations, and judicial precedents of these provisions in a complex legal framework. It also explores the interplay between legal mandates and forensic methodologies, emphasising compliance with sections 61 and 63 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, which delineates admissibility requirements for electronic records. This paper further addresses due process concerns, including the requirement of special judicial warrants, challenges in cross-border digital investigations, and procedural gaps in handling encrypted and cloud-based data including digital personal data. Furthermore, the paper discusses challenges such as encryption barriers, electronic evidence retrieval, and the exigency for a comprehensive National Cyber Forensic Policy, comparing India’s approach with global best practices from the US, UK, and EU Cybersecurity laws. The paper also refers to key judicial precedents, both Indian and International, that have shaped the legal contours of digital search and seizure. In addition to it, a comparative analysis with the US Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 1986 (ECPA) and the UK’s Investigatory Powers Act, 2016 highlights best practices for balancing state surveillance powers with individual rights. Considering the fact of decolonising Indian criminal laws, both substantive and procedural, and leaving this crucial aspect unaddressed creates a policy vacuum. Finally, the paper proposes legislative and procedural reforms, for strengthening forensic integration in search and seizure operations, including capacity-building for all stakeholders namely judicial sensitisation including that of Public Prosecutors, personnel of Law Enforcement Agencies; a National Framework for Cyber Forensic and Digital Evidence handling, and stricter compliance mechanisms for Law Enforcement Agencies, ensuring that search and seizure in the cases involving digital evidence and cyberspace, aligns with constitutional principles and international legal standards.