Response

A Private Handwriting Experts Report is reliable and acceptable piece of evidence in Court Law. However, before such Handwriting Experts Report can be admitted in evidence, it has to be proved that such person is qualified as an Expert in the subject, and that the process of handwriting analysis adopted by him is a recognized standard globally for hand writing analysis.

Once the qualification and method of analysis is proved, then his evidence and opinion becomes admissible in the Court of Law. However, the report of handwriting expert is only one of the evidences, and it is not conclusive and whole some evidence in the Court to prove fraud or not.

Whether in a given case, whether fraud document is made or not, depends upon facts and circumstances of each case.

Yes you can submit the private handwriting report as –ow a days private companies are only giving handwriting reports further you can ask to the handwriting expert as per the court you can submit your report if anything court feels than they can call their experts.

Sec. 45 to Sec.51 under Chapter-II of the Indian Evidence Act provide relevancy of opinion of third persons, which is commonly called in our day to day practice as expertÕs opinion. These provisions are exceptional in nature to the general rule that evidence is to be given of the facts only which are within the knowledge of a witness. The exception is based on the principle that the court canÕt form opinion on the matters, which are technically complicated and professionally sophisticated, without assistance of the persons who have acquired special knowledge and skill on those matters.

The definition of an expert may be referred from the provision of Sec.45 of Indian Evidence Act that an ÔExpertÕ means a person who has special knowledge, skill or experience in any of the following—-
1) foreign law,
2) science
3) art
4) handwriting or
5) finger impression

Reference: It is submitted on behalf of the applicants that in order to facilitate the accused to prepare their proper defence, it may be necessary for them to take advice of an expert so as to be able to confront the opinion of the State expert with the opinion of the private expert and also to find out whether the opinion given by the State expert is proper or not.

It was submitted that the private handwriting expert cannot give opinion without the enlarged photographs of admitted and disputed writings and hence the accused would not be able to prepare his defence properly in absence of such photographs. As against this it was submitted on behalf of the State that the documents are in the Court and if the accused wanted they could take the photographs, enlarge them and consult their own expert.

This is certainly an attractive suggestion but the question to be considered is whether this would be meeting the requirements of section 173(5) or section 207 of the Criminal P. C. which are enacted with a view to facilitating the accused to effectively prepare his own defence. In order to understand the necessity for proposing these amendments, it will be worthwhile to refer to the previous enactments and also the necessity to make this change.

So far as giving of copies is concerned, the amendment was carried out by Act 26 of 1955 so far as section 173 is concerned. Prior to 1955 section 173 of the Criminal Procedure Code was to the following effect

If that opportunity is available to the accused, the accused can show the photographs to a private handwriting expert and get proper help. It may be that the accused person who is able to spend may call a private handwriting expert in the Court and get the copies prepared but it would be too much to expect that the expert would come to the Court and by looking merely to the documents would be in a position to give an opinion and also instruct the advocate of the accused to put questions to challenge the opinion given by the State handwriting expert or there may be cases where the advocate of the accused having sympathy for the accused may himself prepare with the help of the expert’s aid and books by properly studying the handwriting. In both the cases the enlarged photographs would be quite necessary.

It cannot be said by the State that the persons who can afford the photographs only will be having that benefit by making payment and those who cannot afford it would be deprived of that opportunity. This aspect can never lie in the mouth of a State, as the legislature has enacted the statute in the form of section 173 of Criminal P. C. with the object of giving the accused a proper opportunity for preparing his defence.

202100333-20210021-2013

LAWAYZ-2023-242