Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.18 seconds)
Magan Bihari Lal vs State Of Punjab on 15 February, 1977 cites

Shashi Kumar Banerjee & Ors vs Subodh Kumar Banerjee Since Deceased & ... on 13 September, 1963

This Court again pointed out in Ishwari Prasad v. Md. Isa(2) that expert evidence of hand- writing can never be conclusive because it is, after all, opinion evidence, and this view was reiterated in Shashi Kumar v. Subodh Kumar (3) where it was pointed out by this Court that expert's evidence as to handwriting being opinion evidence can rarely, if ever, take the place of substantive evidence and before acting on such evidence, it would be desirable to consider whether it is corroborated either by clear_ direct evidence or by Circumstantial evidence.
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 650 - Full Document

Fakhruddin vs The State on 6 February, 1976

This Court had again occasion to consider the evidentiary value o[ expert opinion in regard to handwriting in Fakhruddin v. State(4) and it uttered a note of caution pointing out that it would be risky to found a conviction solely on the evi- dence of a handwriting expert and before acting upon such evidence. the court must always try to see whether it is corroborated by other evidence, direct or circumstantial. It is interesting to note that the same view is also echoed in the judgments of English and American courts.
Allahabad High Court Cites 38 - Cited by 3 - Full Document

Ram Chandra And Anr. vs State Of Uttar Pradesh on 26 November, 1956

It is now well settled that expert opinion must always be received with great caution and perhaps none so with more caution than the opinion of a handwriting expert. There is a profusion of precendential authority which holds that it is unsafe to base a conviction solely on expert opinion without substantial corroboration. This rule has been universally acted upon and it has almost become a rule of law. It was held by this Court in Ram Chandra v. State(1) that it is unsafe to treat expert hand- writing opinion as sufficient basis for conviction, but it may be relied upon when supported by other items o[ internal and external evidence.
Supreme Court of India Cites 9 - Cited by 130 - Full Document

Ishwari Prasad Mishra vs Mohammad Isa on 27 August, 1962

This Court again pointed out in Ishwari Prasad v. Md. Isa(2) that expert evidence of hand- writing can never be conclusive because it is, after all, opinion evidence, and this view was reiterated in Shashi Kumar v. Subodh Kumar (3) where it was pointed out by this Court that expert's evidence as to handwriting being opinion evidence can rarely, if ever, take the place of substantive evidence and before acting on such evidence, it would be desirable to consider whether it is corroborated either by clear_ direct evidence or by Circumstantial evidence.
Supreme Court of India Cites 0 - Cited by 177 - P B Gajendragadkar - Full Document
1