R/CR.

MA/21126/2015 ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE

FIR/ORDER) NO. 21126 of 2015
With
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 19877 of 2015
==========================================================
ASHISH ISHWARBHAI VAGHELA & 1....Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 1....Respondent(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR ASHISH M DAGLI, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1 - 2
MR. BHADRISH S RAJU, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR MITESH AMIN, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI

Date : 26/04/2016

ORAL ORDER

1. Applicant of Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 19877 of

2015 by virtue of the order dated 29.10.2015 has been protected by

way of ad interim relief whereby the investigating agency is directed

to refrain from arresting these applicants while allowing to continue

with further investigation. This order from time to time has been

extended in favour of the applicants.

2. This Court on 22.3.2016 in Criminal Miscellaneous Application

No. 21126 of 2015 passed the following order:-

“ It can be noticed that learned 10th Additional Senior

Civil Judge, Vadodara in order dated 17.3.2016 in Probate
Application No.13 of 2016 had directed the Registry to hand

Page 1 of 9

Downloaded on : Thu Nov 02 22:23:15 IST 2023

 R/CR.MA/21126/2015 ORDER

over the original bill to the investigating officer after keeping

three certified copies with Nazir Department. The Court also
directed the original seal to be once again deposited with
the Registry at the earliest. However, no time period is
given. No time period is specified for the examination and
filing of the report of FSL and the hand writing expert.
Let such examination be carried out at the earliest and the
report be submitted to the concerned Court latest before
22.4.2016. It has been ensured by the applicants to
cooperate with the investigating officer in giving the
specimen writing.
Let this matter be notified on 24.4.2016 for further hearing.
In the event of any difficulty either side will be at liberty to
approach this Court. Ad interim relief to continue till then.”

3. Learned Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1-State on

instructions from the investigating officer has urged that the required

cooperation was not available from the applicant of Criminal

Miscellaneous Application No.19877 of 2015. She was needed to give

her specimen writing as also natural writings of her father.

4. According to learned advocate for the applicant-lady, there is

objection for giving specimen writing of the signature of the father of

the applicant. This Court passed the following order dated 25.4.2016

as under:-

“1. The Investigating Officer is present. Learned APP,

on instructions, submits that the cooperation, which is
expected from the Respondent No.2 is not coming forth.
According to learned Advocate, Mr. Unwala, Respondent is
ready to cooperate not only to provide the natural writings
and also the specimen writings. However, the insistence to
give specimen writing signature of the father of the
petitioner is being objected to.

2. Let the Investigating Officer file an affidavit explaining the

requirement for specimen writing signature of the father of
the petitioner. He shall also produce the communication, if
any, from the Scientific Officer having expertise in the filed
of handwriting to appraise the Court the need for such

Page 2 of 9

Downloaded on : Thu Nov 02 22:23:15 IST 2023

 R/CR.MA/21126/2015 ORDER

insistence. Let the matter appear tomorrow, i.e. on 26TH

APRIL, 2016, at 11:00 A.M..

3. Ad-interim-relief granted earlier to continue, till then.”

5. Affidavit-in-reply has been filed by one Bhikhabhai Kalubhai

Bariya, Police Inspector, DCB police station, Vadodara City urging

inter alia that her hand writings can be obtained from the concerned

Court as the matter is sub-judice. She is not ready and willing to give

specimen signature of her father. However, she is ready to give her

specimen signature only before the Court of learned Additional Civil

Judge. It is also pointed out that she moved an application on

24.4.2015 by making an excuse that since the date of hearing before

the Court was 20.4.2016, she could not remain present. On 20.4.2016

there was a public holiday. Therefore, in wake of such non-

cooperation, the matter is not proceeding further. It is urged that the

parties are not asking her to forge any document or to make forged

signature but they need to follow the Police Manual (“the Manual” for

short) for collecting the signatures and specimen writings.

6. Learned Public Prosecutor Mr.Mitesh Amin for respondent No.1-

State has urged that for want of cooperation the specimen writings,

natural writings and disputed writings could not be sent and

examined by the Examiner of Questioned Documents. She has urged

that what is required is to give specimen signature as provided under

the Manual and unless those specimen writings and signatures are

sent to the Handwriting and Photographic Bureau, Directorate of

Page 3 of 9

Downloaded on : Thu Nov 02 22:23:15 IST 2023

 R/CR.MA/21126/2015 ORDER

Forensic Science, the officer concerned may not be in a position to

examine the same for carrying out the examination and no officer is

asking her to challenge the document, signature or the writings.

7. Learned advocate Mr. Bhadrish Raju appearing for the

complainant has urged that Rule 167 sub-rule(6) of the Manual

provides for instructions that are to be scrupulously observed while

forwarding documents for examination in the Handwriting and

Photographic Bureau of the State Criminal Investigation Department.

According to him, the said rules and sub-rules are to be followed

scrupulously. Day in and day out specimen writings have been

insisted from the persons, who are arraigned as accused. That in no

manner amounts to police officer insisting for forgery of document

since it is a requirement of law. According to him, the same should be

allowed.

8. Learned advocate Mr. Jal Soli Unwala for the applicants has not

insisted on any of the averments made by the petitioner except of not

giving her specimen signature before the police officer, as has been

done in the will, which is of that of her father. According to learned

advocate Mr. Unwala, to insist upon such signature would amount to

self-incrimination and the officer concerned cannot insist on specimen

writings and signatures with the very style etc. as the alphabets of

the disputed signatures are even otherwise included in the specimen

writings and therefore the same writings and the signatures as the

disputed writings/signatures could not have been insisted upon.

Page 4 of 9

Downloaded on : Thu Nov 02 22:23:15 IST 2023

 R/CR.MA/21126/2015 ORDER

9. Having thus heard learned advocates for both the sides, the

question that requires to be considered is as to whether the police

officer can insist upon the collection of specimen hand

writings/signatures for forwarding the documents and such writings

for examination to the Handwriting and Photographic Bureau,

Directorate of Forensic Science insisting on the writings almost

similar to those of the disputed writings/signatures.

10. If one looks at the detailed procedure, as provided by the police

Manual, particularly, sub-rule (6) of Rule 167, the same provides for

examination by the Handwriting and Photographic Bureau of the

State Criminal Investigation Department which insists upon its

specimen handwritings. It also insists that natural admitted writings

and signatures should be in the same script as that of the questioned

ones. Signatures or writing in different scripts should not be sent. The

natural admitted writings should be so selected as to contain

sufficient words in the common with those from the questioned

writings. When taking specimen handwritings of several suspected or

accused persons, the writings of each individual should be taken on

separate sheet and not on the same sheet. In case where a person is

required to write on separate papers, care be taken to remove the

previously written sheets from the sight of the individual when he is

writing the other specimens. For the purposes of obtaining specimen

handwritings, the matter should be preferably be dictated. The

suspect, if unable readily to write from dictation, should be made to

Page 5 of 9

Downloaded on : Thu Nov 02 22:23:15 IST 2023

 R/CR.MA/21126/2015 ORDER

write from typewritten or printed matter, and not manuscript, so the

chances of imitation or variation of formation may be minimised. In

no case should the suspect be allowed to see the questioned

document to write from.

It is apt to reproduce sub paragraph (iii) of sub-rule (5) of Rule

167 is as under::-

“(iii) Standards of writing for comparison.-It is advisable to

send as many specimens of the handwriting of the
suspected person or person as can conveniently be
obtained. Care should be taken as to the selection of these
standards and no writing should be characterized as
admitted or genuine, unless it is absolutely certain that it is
so. When selecting handwritings for comparison, writings
written about the same period as the document in question
should , as far as possible, be selected. This should be done
in cases where already existing writings of the suspect or
accused are readily available whether contained among any
correspondence or in books or registers. The natural
admitted writings and signatures should be in the same
script as that of the questioned ones. Signatures or writings
in different scripts should not be sent. The natural admitted
writings should be so selected as to contain sufficient words
in common with those from the questioned writings. When
taking specimen handwritings of several suspected or
accused person, the writings of each individual should be
taken on separate sheeets and not on the same sheet. In
cases where a person is required to give several specimens
of his signature, it is also advisable to take each specimen
on a separate paper, care being taken to remove the
previously written sheets from the sight of the individual
when he is writing the other specimens. For the purposes of
obtaining specimen handwritings, the matter should be
preferably be dictated. The suspect, if unable readily to
write from dictation, should be made to write from
typewritten or printed matter, and not manuscript, so the
chances of imitation or variation of formation may be
minimised. In no case should the suspect be allowed to see
the questioned document to write from. When any lengthy
piece of writing is dictated or given for copy, the actual time
occupied in writing should be noted and also the kind of pen
used and the position of the paper while in the act of writing,
i.e., whether laid on a flat hard surface, or held across the
palm or placed across the thigh or in any other position. The

Page 6 of 9

Downloaded on : Thu Nov 02 22:23:15 IST 2023

 R/CR.MA/21126/2015 ORDER

officer taking the specimen should state on it the name of

the writer together with the particulars above referred to,
and affix the date of the writing. He should also certify on
the same sheet, that the specimen was written in his
presence. Admitted writings, if undated, should if possible,
bear on them a pencil entry giving the probable date of the
writing e.g. “Said to have been written in July, 1904”. In the
same way, if the disputed document bears no date, the
supposed or probable date of writing, or the date of receipt,
should be ascertained and noted.”

11. From the Manual which is being followed in every case, it is

obvious that while obtaining specimen writings, the officer taking

specimen is required to follow the detailed procedure. Signatures or

writings are also expected to be in the same script and for all other

details of collection of the sample absolute care needs to be taken so

that in no manner, there is any chance of imitation or variation of

formation . It also insists that in no case should the suspect be

allowed to see the questioned document to write from.

12. As is also pointed out by learned Public Prosecutor for the

respondent No.1-State, on the basis of standard communication

received from the Hand-writings and Photographic Bureau that every

time by the Investigating agency, natural and specimen documents,

signatures and writings are to be obtained for comparison with the

disputed writings and they shall be as provided in the Check list

produced at R7 with the affidavit-in-reply. It further says that where

the writings and signatures are as per the disputed writings and

signatures, the authorities are required to send the details of the

specimen of handwriting and signatures in the form as prescribed by

Page 7 of 9

Downloaded on : Thu Nov 02 22:23:15 IST 2023

 R/CR.MA/21126/2015 ORDER

Handwriting and Photographic Bureau, FSL. It is being followed on

regular basis by the investigating agency. It is also forming the part

of the Manual as per the standard communication addressed by FSL,

Hand Writing and Photographic Bureau, Directorate of FSL,

Gandhinagar.

Therefore also, the objections raised by the applicants are

found to be unsustainable.

13. It is to be noted that the apprehension shown on the part of the

applicant and as raised through the learned advocate appearing for

the applicant also, in the opinion of this Court, has no valid and

sustainable basis. Not only the Manual provides for all safety

measures, one of the most rigorous checks against any overzealous

officer is of getting this specimen signatures and writings by getting

details dictated. It has gone to the extent of saying that the suspect is

also not to be shown the disputed signatures so that there may not

be any chance of imitation. The same can be dictated and if the

suspect is the person who, cannot take dictation of specimen writing,

he/she needs to be shown typed version of writing.

14. As rightly submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor Mr.Mitesh

Amin that no matter what the writings or the nature of signature are,

it is ultimately the suspect or the person concerned, who is expected

to write in his own writings and that needs to be examined and

compared with the natural writings. Therefore also, there does not

arise any question of jeopardizing the interest of the applicant. The

Page 8 of 9

Downloaded on : Thu Nov 02 22:23:15 IST 2023

 R/CR.MA/21126/2015 ORDER

applicant is, in no manner, going to be self-incriminating, as is

apprehended by her.

15. Learned Public Prosecutor has stated that original applicant has
given a list of the documents which are required to be in original. At
this stage learned Public Prosecutor makes a request to examine
some of the documents which are lying with the Court below.

The investigating officer may give an appropriate application

through the learned Public Prosecutor and the Court concerned will
consider the same in accordance with law.

16. Resultantly, this request is not entertained. Applicant is

directed to provide her specimen writings of the signatures as
required by the Scientific Officer looking after the Handwriting and
Photographic Bureau by a separate purshis of the applicant.

17. The collection of specimen writings should be completed at the

earliest. Let this be sent to the FSL. Once collected, the report shall
be obtained at the earliest, but in no case later than four weeks from
the date of receipt of these documents from the Handwritings and
Photographic Bureau, Directorate of Forensic Science, Gandhinagar.
In the event of any difficulty, either side is at liberty to approach this
Court.

S.O. to 5.5.2016.

(MS SONIA GOKANI, J.)

SUDHIR

Page 9 of 9

Downloaded on : Thu Nov 02 22:23:15 IST 2023