Hameer Singh vs State And Ors

The petitioner Hameer Singh seeks to assail the order dated 15.03.2018 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge Women Atrocities Act

Cases, Jodhpur Metroplitan in Sessions Case No.46/2015 whereby, the application filed by the defence seeking comparison of handwriting on the

suicide note allegedly left behind by the deceased before ending her life was rejected.

I have heard and considered the submissions advanced by Shri Vineet Jain, learned counsel representing the petitioner and Shri Pradeep Choudhary,

learned counsel representing the complainant and the learned Public Prosecutor Ms. Anita Gehlot and have gone through the impugned order.

The petitioner is facing trial before the trial court for the offences under Sections 498A and 304B IPC. He set up a pertinent defence that before

ending her life, his wife Smt. Nirma wrote a suicide note which was seized by the police during investigation. During the course of the investigation,

the I.O. also collected the leave application purportedly for comparison of handwritings, submitted by the deceased at her school, the suicide note was

not sent for handwriting comparison, whereupon, the defence filed the application which has been rejected as above. However, as the prosecution has

chosen not to rely upon the said suicide note as it runs contrary to its case.

Shri Jain, learned counsel representing the petitioner, points out that the complainant (PW-6) Bhagirath Singh, being the father of the deceased, was

confronted with the leave application (Ex.D/2) and he agreed to the suggestion that the leave application was in handwriting of the deceased and that

she appended her signatures thereon. Shri Jain submits that the leave application is an uncontroverted document having admitted handwriting of the

deceased and therefore, ends of justice and principles of fair trial warranted that the trial court should have directed forwarding of the suicide note to

the FSL Handwriting Expert for comparison. In support of his contentions, Shri Jain placed reliance on the order dated 13.04.2012 passed by this

Court in the case of Bali Devi vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.219/2019) and implored the Court to accept the petitioner in the

terms prayed for.

Per contra, Shri Pradeep Choudhary, learned counsel representing the complainant vehemently and fervently opposed the submissions of Shri Jain and

urged that there is no material on record of the case which can satisfy the Court regarding the admitted handwriting of the deceased. The accused, if

he so desires, can get the document compared through his own sources and thus, there is no justification to direct comparison of the handwritings

through a Government Handwriting Expert.

Learned Public Prosecutor also supported the contentions of the complainant’s counsel.

I have given my thoughtful consideration to the submissions advanced at bar and have gone through the material available on record.

It cannot be denied that the suicide note, if found to have been written by the deceased, would provide a very important piece of evidence and could

prove vital to a just decision of the case. Unquestionably, the suicide note was collected by the I.O. during investigation. The leave application which

the defence claims to be in the undisputed handwriting of the deceased was also collected by the I.O. from the school where she studied. The

observation made by the trial court in the impugned order that Hameer Singh is an illiterate man and thus, he could not have identified the handwriting

of his daughter, is per se perverse and contrary to record because he admitted in his cross-examination that the document (Ex.D/8) was in his

daughter’s handwriting and that he too signed the same.

In this background, I am of the firm opinion that the defence could not be deprived of the opportunity of having the document (suicide note) examined

through a Government Handwriting Expert because in my opinion, such an exercise is required for reaching for a just decision of the case. In a

scenario, the writing is found dissimilar, the defence would not gain any advantage from the document.

As a consequence, the misc. petition deserves to be accepted. The impugned order dated 15.03.2018 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge

Women Atrocities Act Cases, Jodhpur Metroplitan in Sessions Case No.46/2015 is hereby set aside. The learned trial court shall forthwith instruct the

investigating officer/ prosecution agency to send the suicide note as well as the leave application both purportedly written by the deceased to the FSL,

Rajasthan in a sealed cover for comparison by the Government Handwriting Expert at the FSL concerned who shall compare the handwritings on the

two documents. The report of comparison shall be prepared and forwarded by the Expert within a period of three months from the date of receipt of

the documents.

The parties would be at liberty to seek summoning of the Handwriting Expert in evidence for proving the report, if so desired, after receipt of the

Handwriting Expert’s report.

With these observations and directions, the misc. petition is allowed. Stay application is disposed of.