SAIYEDMIYA AHMEDMIYA SAIYED Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule No doubt, Trial Court and the Court of Appeal both have held against the petitioner-accused. The decisions of both the Courts are based on report of handwriting expert produced at Exh. 103. The charge against the accused-petitioner was that of the offence under Sec. 406, Indian Penal Code. It related to sale of a truck which was effected in favour of the original complainant initially and thereafter according to the complainant, it was taken away by the petitioner-accused and sold away. The defence allthro'ughout was that the complainant had returned the truck for which a writing was executed and as stated therein, part payment was also made.

(2.) The complainant side was insisting that this writing is a got up one and does not bear the signature of the complainant. It was sent for the opinion of handwriting expert and his report was received with covering letter at Exh. 98. No sooner it was received, all the letters accompanied with the said Exh. 98 including handwriting expert's opinion came to be exhibited by the Trial Court.

(3.) Obviously, this being a document not covered be Sec. 292 of the Code of Criminal Procedure it could not have been straightway exhibited without examining the expert who has given the opinion.