Allowed

S C Aggarwal v. Central Bureau of Investigation

Delhi HC10 Jan 2018W.P.(CRL)/56/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this order, the High Court disposed of a writ petition and miscellaneous application. The court accepted the petitioner's submission to treat an application under Section 47 of the Evidence Act as an application for private expert inspection and photography. The handwriting expert was permitted to inspect records and take photographs.

What did the court decide?

Handwriting expert permitted to inspect record and take photographs of disputed and admitted signatures as a privately appointed expert.

S C Aggarwal Vs Central Bureau of Investigation — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

$~43

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(CRL) 56/2018

¶4

S C AGGARWAL ..... Petitioner

¶5

Through Mr. Sanjay Sehgal with Mr. Tarun Narang, Advocates.

¶6

versus

¶7

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION ..... Respondent Through Mr. Anupan S. Sharma with Mr. Sachin Gautam with Mr. Shivam Gupta, Advocates.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA O R D E R % 10.01.2018

¶10

Crl.M.A. 364/2018 (exemption)

¶11

Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions.

¶12

W.P.(CRL) 56/2018 & Crl.M.A. 363/2018 (stay)

¶13

After some arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is willing to give up his challenge to the order dated 19.12.2017, whereby, his application under Section 47 of the Indian Evidence Act has been rejected and prays that the said application be treated as an application for inspection and taking of photographs of the disputed and admitted signatures, by the handwriting expert, referred to in the said application, who would be treated as an expert appointed by the petitioner on his own and not be treated as an expert to whom the issue is referred to for an opinion by the Court.

¶14

W.P.(CRL) 56/2018

¶15

Page 1

¶16

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent CBI submits that he has no objection to the application being treated as an application for inspection and taking of photographs of the disputed and admitted signatures by the handwriting expert, referred to in the said application, who is to be treated as an expert appointed by the petitioner, privately.

¶17

In view of the above, the handwriting expert i.e. Sayeed Faizal Huda & Sayeed Faizal Huda, referred to in the said application, is treated as a handwriting expert appointed by the petitioner on his own.

¶18

The said handwriting expert would be permitted to inspect the record and take photographs of the disputed and the admitted signatures available on the record. Thereafter, it would be open to the petitioner to take steps in accordance with law.

¶19

The petition is disposed of in the above terms.

¶20

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J

¶21

JANUARY 10, 2018 st

¶22

W.P.(CRL) 56/2018

¶23

Page 2

S C Aggarwal v. Central Bureau of Investigation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S C Aggarwal v. Central Bureau of Investigation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Darshan Rani & Anr. Vs the State (Nct of Delhi) & Ors.

Ravi @ Bire Vs State

Kamender Vs State

Arun Menon & Ors. Vs State of NCT Delhi & Anr.

Karan & Anr. Vs Chameli Devi

Ravinder Singh Vs State (Nct of Delhi) & Anr.

Kanish Raaj Gambhir Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Prakash Nagar Vs District Magistrate & Ors.

Arun Kumar & Anr. Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Yash Kapoor & Ors. Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Raj Kumar Vs State (Govt of NCT of Delhi)

Ranjeet Singh & Ors. Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Manjeet Singh & Ors. Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.