RAKESH KAPOOR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner-original accused and the learned A.P.P. for the State. Rule. By consent, rule is made returnable forthwith.

(2.) The petitioner is facing prosecution in case under Sections 420, 465 and 467 of IPC. The said case is numbered as RCC No.242/P/1984 and is pending before the Court of Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 19th Court at Esplanade Mumbai. In the said case, the prosecution preferred an application for exhibiting the report of the handwriting expert under Section 293 of Cr.P.C. The said application came to be allowed by order dated 22.5.2008 and the report of the handwriting expert came to be exhibited. Being aggrieved by the said order, present petition has been preferred.

(3.) Admittedly the report of the Handwriting expert was exhibited without examining the person who had given the report. Mr.Mundargi, learned counsel for petitioner contended that only certain reports from the government scientific experts are admissible in evidence without examination of the expert in view of the provisions of Section 293, Cr.P.C. As per sub-section (4) of Section 293, this section applies to (a) Chemical Examiner or Assistant Chemical Examiner to Government; (b) the Chief Inspector of explosives; (c) The Director of the Finger Print Bureau; (d) The Director, Haffkeine Institute, Bombay; (e) The Director, (Deputy Director or Assistant Director) of a Central Forensic Science Laboratory or a State Forensic Science Laboratory and (f) the Serologist to the Government. Thus it is seen that section 293 is not applicable to the handwriting expert. Section 45 of the Evidence Act provides that when the Court has to form an opinion upon a point of foreign law, or of science, or art, or as to identity of handwriting or finger impressions, the opinions upon that point, of persons specially skilled in such field are relevant facts and such persons are called experts. Thus, report of handwriting expert is relevant and admissible in evidence under Section 45. However, Section 45 does not provide that such report would be admissible in evidence without examining the expert. I have already pointed out that Section 293, Criminal Procedure Code specifically provides only for reports of certain scientific authorities which can be admitted in evidence without examining them before the Court and report of handwriting expert is not one of them.