JUDGEMENT (Rajasthan High Court Atma Ram vs State Of Rajasthan And Anr. on 20 January, 1999)

REPORT OF ANIL KUMAR GUPTA HANDWRITING EXPERT HAS BEEN PREFERRED OVER REPORT OF STATE FORENSIC SCIENCE LAB RAJASTHAN AS REPORT OF ANIL KUMAR GUPTA CONTAINS DETAILED REASONS AND THERE ARE NO REASON GIVEN IN THE REPORT OF FORENSIC SCIENCE LAB (FSL).

Rajasthan High Court

Atma Ram vs State Of Rajasthan And Anr. on 20 January, 1999

Equivalent citations: 1999 CriLJ 4274

Author: G Gupta

Bench: G Gupta

ORDER G.L. Gupta, J.

Mr. Shishodia contended that by the opinion of the F.S.L. it is not borne out that the letter was written by the deceased. In my opinion, at this stage, on the basis of the report of the F.S.L. it cannot be accepted that the letter in which the allegation of cruelty soon before the death of Vijay Laxmi is mentioned, was not written by the accused. There is also the report of handwriting expert               Shri Anil Kumar Gupta on record. It is a detailed report containing various points. It has been opined that the writing of the letter tallied with the specimen writings of the deceased. It is obvious, there are two opposite opinions on record; one favouring the accused and the other against him.      As the report of Anil Kumar Gupta contains reasonings and there are no reasons given in the report of F.S.L., at this stage, the report of Anil Kumar Gupta has to be preferred. Mahendra Singh also says that the letter dt. 12-8-1993 was written by his daughter. That being so, on the basis of the report of the F.S.L. at this stage, it cannot be said that the letter dt. 12-8-1993 was not written by the deceased.

Consequently, there is no merit in the Revision Petition No. 126/98 and Misc. Petition No. 51 /98 filed by Atma Ram and they are hereby dismissed. The Revision Petition No. 281/98 preferred by Mahendra Singh is also dismissed.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top