Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

52.In the present case, one more fact is very important to observe that the source of procuring documents on which the reports of the experts are based is not beyond doubts. I have an opportunity to see the Court statements of both the experts, relying on whose reports, the learned Judicial Magistrate had taken cognizance and the trial Court has framed the charges and is proceeding with the trial. Both these experts could not reveal as to how they obtained the documents upon which their reports are based, rather it is very much doubtful as to whether they have procured these documents through any valid and legally recognised source. In Jagmal Singh Yadav v. Aimaduddin Ahmed Khan, 1994 Supp (2) SCC 308, at page 314 the Hon'ble Supreme Court refused to hold the charge proved against the appellant on the testimony of the handwriting expert when the source from which the document produced found to be highly tainted and doubtful. This ambiguity, in the backdrop of unchallenged allegations of the petitioners that the wife and sons of the complainant himself has accepted genuineness and authenticity of the Will and that he (the complainant/ Respondent No.2) has filed the complaint without impleading them while they are also the beneficiaries HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH: BENCH AT INDORE Abhay Jain and others vs. State of M.P. and Anr. of the Will, further strengthen the doubts regarding intention of the Respondent No.2 behind filing of the criminal proceedings.