LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

  • The Supreme Court in a Ballistic Report forwarded by the Director/ Deputy Director/ Assistant Director of a lab under the seal observed that it complies with the statutory requirement under Section 293 CrPC.
  • Section 293 CrPC provides for reports of certain Government scientific experts that could be admissible evidence in a court of law.
  • Section 293 CrPC deals with documents purporting to be a report under Government scientific expert for any matter submitted to him for examination or analysis. The report given by him during proceedings shall be used as evidence in inquiry, trial, or any proceeding under the code.
  • The Allahabad High Court reversed the acquittal of the Trial Court and convicted all the accused for offences committed under Sections 148, 302 read with 149 and 307 read with 149 of IPC, sentencing them to life imprisonment.
  • The Trial Court in acquitting the accused of a murder case rejected the admission of ballistic reports on the ground that the report was not self-signed by an Assistant Director and the report signed by a Scientific Officer was forwarded to the Assistant Director.
  • The High Court allowed the appeal and held that the report cannot be discarded.
  • The Supreme Court upheld the views of the High Court and observed that the pre-requisite under Section 293 has adhered thereto.
  • The Apex Court Bench held that the report is to be treated as given by the Government Scientific Expert as being the Director, Deputy Director, or Assistant Director of the Central Forensic Science Laboratory or State Forensic Science Laboratory according to Section 293(4) (e) of CrPC.
  • Citing the case of State of Himachal Pradesh v. Mast Ram, the court held that since the ballistic report was received from the Assistant Director’s office bearing his seal and being in context with Section 293(4) of CrPC as provided in the case referred, it was upheld that the Trial Court passed an erroneous order in rejecting the ballistic report and it was right for the High Court to reverse the judgment.
  • The judgment delivered by High Court was upheld by the Supreme Court.
"Loved reading this piece by Kavya Sri?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"

Tags :

  Views  34  Report

Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query