MANORAMA NAIK Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) The impugned order dtd. 27/6/2016 has quashed the order taking cognizance passed by the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Puri in G.R. Case No. 854/2010 under Ss. 467 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, on the ground that the opinion of the handwriting expert on the disputed signatures was non conclusive.

(3.) It is pointed out that the opinion of the handwriting expert was filed for the first time before the High Court and was not available with the Trial Court at the time when cognizance was taken. That apart, the signatures and handwriting of the person can also be proved under Ss. 45, 47 and 73 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Therefore, opinion of the handwriting expert is not the only way or mode of providing the signature and handwriting of a person.