2010 2 ChLT 374 ; 2010 4 CIJ 623 ; 2010 2 LW 793 ; 2010 2 MLJ 1035 ; 2010 1 MWN(Civ) 599 ; 2010 0 Supreme(Mad) 456
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. JEYAPAUL
K.Tharush Moideen
Versus
Hasan Ambalam
C.R.P.(PD)No.2398 of 2009 & M.P.No.1 of 2009
Decided on : 02-02-2010
Ratios:
a. Any entry in any public or official book, register or record relate to a fact in issue or relevant fact made by a public servant in discharge of his official duty or in performance of a duty substantially enjoined upon him by law would be deemed as true and correct.
b. Not only the records reflecting the acts of a public servant but also all the documents which form part of such acts would be classified as public documents.
c. Opinion given by a scientific officer in discharge of his official function would be a public document.
(A)Indian Evidence Act, 1872(1 of 1872)-Sec.35, 74-Evidence-Public document-Private document-Public servant-Opinion-Government Forensic expert had given an opinion in the course of his duty which was marked by the prosecution in a criminal case-Defendant had obtained certified copy of it and marked it in civil suit which was objected by the plaintiff-When trial Court marked it under objection, the marking was challenged by the plaintiff who contended that it was only an opinion and the marking was bad in law-Defendant defended his act and the marking-Held, the opinion of the Forensic expert working in Government was a public document and the marking of that document was proper and the burden to disprove it was shifted to the plaintiff-Revision dismissed.
(B)Indian Evidence Act, 1872(1 of 1872)-Sec.35, 74-Evidence-Public document-Public servant-Any entry in any public or official book, register or record relate to a fact in issue or relevant fact made by a public servant in discharge of his official duty or in performance of a duty substantially enjoined upon him by law would be deemed as true and correct.
As per section 35 of the Indian Evidence Act, the entry relied upon must be one in any public or official book, register or record. Secondly, it must relate to a fact in issue or relevant fact. Thirdly, it must be made by a public servant in discharge of his official duty or any person in performance of a duty substantially enjoined upon him by law. The presumption is that a public servant, who makes such entry in the relevant public record has made it truly and correctly in the discharge of his official duty. Para 5
(C)Indian Evidence Act, 1872(1 of 1872)-Sec.35, 74-Evidence-Public document-Public servant-Opinion-Not only the records reflecting the acts of a public servant but also all the documents which form part of such acts would be classified as public documents.
In my considered opinion, not only the records reflecting the acts of a public servant but also all the documents which form part of such acts would be classified as public documents. In the aforesaid decision, a narrow meaning has been assigned to the phrase "documents forming the acts" or "records of the acts" when actually those two phrases give different meanings. Para 10
(D)Indian Evidence Act, 1872(1 of 1872)-Sec.35, 74-Evidence-Public document-Public servant-Scientific officer-Opinion-Opinion given by a scientific officer in discharge of his official function would be a public document.
An opinion was sought for by the investigating officer in a criminal case. The Scientific Officer had expressed his opinion in discharge of his official function and the same was communicated to the investigating officer concerned. The opinion given by him cannot be separated from the official act he performed. Such a function of a Scientific Officer would definitely fall under the category of a public document. Para 11
Act Referred :EVIDENCE ACT : S.74
Advocates appeared: For the Petitioner: R. Hariharan, M. Vijayakumar, Advocates. For the Respondent: V. Manohar, Advocate.
Judgment :-
The defendant produced Ex.B7 which is a certified copy of the report of the Scientific Officer attached to Forensic Sciences Department, Government of Tamilnadu during the course of evidence and the same was marked with objections by the Trial Court. Such an order passed in the docket sheet by the Trial Court is challenged by the plaintiff in the present revision.
2. Ex.B7 is found to be a certified copy of the report of the Scientific Officer attached to Forensic Sciences Department, Government of Tamilnadu. The same was marked during the course of trial in a case relating to Crime No.25 of 2002 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate I, Poonamallee, having been collected by the investigating officer in that case. The defendant, having obtained a certified copy of the said report of the Scientific Officer, produced it before the court and the same was marked as Ex.B7 overruling the objections raised by the plaintiff. The Trial Court observed that the d
Click Here to Read the rest of this document with a free account to LawCanvas