Back
2016 Supreme(P&H) 83
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
HARIPALVERMA, J.
Mukesh Kumar @ Rinku - Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab - Respondent
Criminal Misc.No.M-44324 of 2015
Decided on : 18.01.2016
Mr. Ajay Kamboj, Advocate for the petitioner.
Section 293 of the Cr.P.C. allows reports of Government scientific experts to be used as evidence and for the expert to be summoned and examined by the court if deemed fit.
Headnote:
Section 293 Cr.P.C. - Examination of Government Scientific Expert - The court dismissed the application for summoning a Chemical Analyzer/Assistant Analyzer, as the report furnished by the Forensic Science Laboratory was admissible under Section 293 of the Cr.P.C., and no interference was required from the court.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. to summon a Chemical Analyzer/Assistant Analyzer, but it was dismissed by the court.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the report furnished by the Forensic Science Laboratory was admissible under Section 293 of the Cr.P.C., and no interference was required from the court.
Issues: The issue was whether the Chemical Analyzer/Assistant Analyzer should be summoned to support their report.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on Section 293 of the Cr.P.C., which allows reports of Government scientific experts to be used as evidence and for the expert to be summoned and examined by the court if deemed fit.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the application, stating that no interference was required as the report furnished by the Forensic Science Laboratory was admissible under Section 293 of the Cr.P.C.
HARIPALVERMA, J.
Challenge in the present petition is to the impugned judgment dated 04.06.2015 passed by Judge, Special Court, Bathinda (Annexure P2) vide which the application filed by the petitioner under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for summoning Chemical Analyzer/Assistant Analyzer, (Texicology) Forensic Science Laboratory, Punjab, who chemically examined samples of contrband sent by the prosecution, was dismissed.
Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the said Analyzer is required to be examined in support of its report.
Heard.
Section 293 of the Cr.P.C. is the clear answer of the aforesaid contention, as put forward by counsel for the petitioner. Section 293 of the Cr.P.C is reproduced as under:
“293. Reports of certain Government scientific experts.
1. Any document purporting to be a report under the hand of a Government scientific expert to whom this section applies, upon any matter or thing duly submitted to him for examination or analysis and report in the course of any proceeding under this Code, may be used as evidence in any inquiry, trial or other proceeding under this Code.
2. The Court may, if it thinks fit, summon and examine any such expert as to the subject matter of his report.
3. Where any such expert is summoned by a Court and he is unable to attend personally, he may, unless the Court has expressly directed him to appear personally, depute any responsible officer working with him to attend the Court, if such officer is conversant with the facts of the case and can satisfactorily depose in Court on his behalf.
4. This section applies to the following Government scientific experts, namely:
(a) any Chemical Examiner or Assistant Chemical Examiner to Government;
(b) the Chief Inspector of Explosives;
(c) the Director of the Finger Print Bureau;
(d) the Director, Haffkeine Institute, Bombay;
(e) the Director, Deputy Director or Assistant Director of a Central Forensic Science Laboratory or a State Forensic Science Laboratory;
(f) the Serologist to the Government.
(g) any other Government scientific expert specified, by notification, by the Central Government for this purpose.”
In view of the specific provision of 293 Cr.P.C. such like reports are perse admissible and report so furnished by the FSL, Punjab contains all details that the petitioner intends to examine, no interference is required from this Court.
Dismissed.
