- Published on
Indian Evidence Law – Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023-Comparison of Signature, Writing or Seal with Others Admitted or Proved [Section 72]
1. Introduction
In legal proceedings, disputes often arise regarding the authenticity of a document—specifically whether a signature, handwriting, or seal on a document truly belongs to the person it purports to represent. To resolve such disputes, the law permits comparison between the disputed writing and other writings that are admitted or duly proved. Section 72 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 provides the statutory framework for such comparison.
2. Statutory Provision under Section 72(a) Comparison of Signature, Writing or Seal
Section 72(1)Section 72(1) authorises the comparison of a disputed signature, handwriting, or seal with any other signature, writing, or seal that has been admitted or proved to the satisfaction of the Court to be genuine.
Such comparison is permissible even if the admitted or proved specimen was not produced earlier for any other purpose in the proceedings.
The object of this provision is to assist the Court in determining the authorship or execution of a document whose authenticity is in question.
(b) Direction to Give Specimen Writing – Section 72(2)
Under Section 72(2), the Court is empowered to direct any person present before it to write words or figures for the purpose of comparison.
The specimen so obtained enables the Court to compare it with the disputed handwriting or signature.
This power is procedural in nature and is exercised to facilitate accurate judicial determination.
(c) Application to Finger Impressions – Section 72(3)
Section 72(3) extends the applicability of this provision to finger impressions.
With suitable modifications, the same principles governing handwriting and signature comparison apply to thumb impressions and fingerprints.
3. Scope and Nature of Section 72
Section 72 does not specify who must conduct the comparison. Accordingly, the comparison may be undertaken by:
4. Power of the Court and Role of Experts
Although Section 72 permits the Court to compare handwriting or signatures, the Court does not assume the role of an expert merely by exercising this power.
The opinion of a handwriting or fingerprint expert remains relevant and must be evaluated alongside other evidence.
Judicial precedents have consistently cautioned that:
5. Judicial Guidance
Courts have held that convictions or findings based solely on casual familiarity with handwriting, without proper foundational material, are unsafe.
Where requests for expert examination are rejected and the Court undertakes comparison on its own for reasons of expediency, such an approach has been criticised as improper.
While judicial comparison is legally permissible, prudence demands that it be exercised cautiously and not treated as the sole basis for conclusions.
6. Specimen Handwriting of a Stranger
The wording of Section 72 empowers the Court to direct “any person” present in Court to provide specimen writing.
This expression is broad and is not confined only to parties to the litigation. Therefore, even a third party or stranger may be directed to give specimen writing if the authenticity of such person’s handwriting becomes relevant in the proceedings.
7. Conclusion
Section 72 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 provides a practical and flexible mechanism for determining the authenticity of signatures, handwriting, seals, and finger impressions. While the Court is empowered to conduct comparisons, judicial discipline requires reliance on expert assistance wherever feasible. The provision balances procedural efficiency with evidentiary caution, ensuring fair and reliable adjudication.
1. Introduction
In legal proceedings, disputes often arise regarding the authenticity of a document—specifically whether a signature, handwriting, or seal on a document truly belongs to the person it purports to represent. To resolve such disputes, the law permits comparison between the disputed writing and other writings that are admitted or duly proved. Section 72 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 provides the statutory framework for such comparison.
2. Statutory Provision under Section 72(a) Comparison of Signature, Writing or Seal
Section 72(1)Section 72(1) authorises the comparison of a disputed signature, handwriting, or seal with any other signature, writing, or seal that has been admitted or proved to the satisfaction of the Court to be genuine.
Such comparison is permissible even if the admitted or proved specimen was not produced earlier for any other purpose in the proceedings.
The object of this provision is to assist the Court in determining the authorship or execution of a document whose authenticity is in question.
(b) Direction to Give Specimen Writing – Section 72(2)
Under Section 72(2), the Court is empowered to direct any person present before it to write words or figures for the purpose of comparison.
The specimen so obtained enables the Court to compare it with the disputed handwriting or signature.
This power is procedural in nature and is exercised to facilitate accurate judicial determination.
(c) Application to Finger Impressions – Section 72(3)
Section 72(3) extends the applicability of this provision to finger impressions.
With suitable modifications, the same principles governing handwriting and signature comparison apply to thumb impressions and fingerprints.
3. Scope and Nature of Section 72
Section 72 does not specify who must conduct the comparison. Accordingly, the comparison may be undertaken by:
- A handwriting expert (Section 39),
- A person acquainted with the handwriting of the individual concerned (Section 41), or
- The Court itself.
4. Power of the Court and Role of Experts
Although Section 72 permits the Court to compare handwriting or signatures, the Court does not assume the role of an expert merely by exercising this power.
The opinion of a handwriting or fingerprint expert remains relevant and must be evaluated alongside other evidence.
Judicial precedents have consistently cautioned that:
- Courts should avoid relying solely on their own comparison, especially when expert assistance is available.
- Expert opinion should ideally guide the Court, with judicial comparison serving as corroborative support.
5. Judicial Guidance
Courts have held that convictions or findings based solely on casual familiarity with handwriting, without proper foundational material, are unsafe.
Where requests for expert examination are rejected and the Court undertakes comparison on its own for reasons of expediency, such an approach has been criticised as improper.
While judicial comparison is legally permissible, prudence demands that it be exercised cautiously and not treated as the sole basis for conclusions.
6. Specimen Handwriting of a Stranger
The wording of Section 72 empowers the Court to direct “any person” present in Court to provide specimen writing.
This expression is broad and is not confined only to parties to the litigation. Therefore, even a third party or stranger may be directed to give specimen writing if the authenticity of such person’s handwriting becomes relevant in the proceedings.
7. Conclusion
Section 72 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 provides a practical and flexible mechanism for determining the authenticity of signatures, handwriting, seals, and finger impressions. While the Court is empowered to conduct comparisons, judicial discipline requires reliance on expert assistance wherever feasible. The provision balances procedural efficiency with evidentiary caution, ensuring fair and reliable adjudication.
0 Comments