Question

Proving of hand writing is provided in Indian Evidence Act

• A. By the opinion of Experts
• B. By the evidence of a person who is acquainted with the handwriting
• C. After police verification
• D. (a) and (b)

Hint:

Remember the three main ways to prove handwriting: Expert Opinion (Sec 45), Non-Expert/Acquainted Person's Opinion (Sec 47), and Court's Own Comparison (Sec 73).

Answer 1

The Correct Option is D

Step 1: Understanding the Concept:
The question asks about the methods of proving handwriting as per the provisions of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

Step 2: Detailed Explanation:
The Indian Evidence Act provides several ways to prove handwriting:
1. Direct Evidence: By the evidence of the person who wrote or signed the document (Section 47).
2. Opinion of an Expert: Under Section 45, the opinion of a handwriting expert is relevant. The court can seek the opinion of a person specially skilled in identifying handwriting. This corresponds to option (A).
3. Opinion of an Acquainted Person: Under Section 47, the opinion of a person who is 'acquainted' with the handwriting of the person in question is relevant. A person is 'acquainted' if they have seen that person write, or have received documents written by them, or have in the ordinary course of business received documents written by them. This corresponds to option (B).
4. Comparison by Court: Under Section 73, the court itself can compare the disputed handwriting with an admitted or proved sample of handwriting.
Both options (A) and (B) are valid and recognized methods under the Evidence Act. Option (C), police verification, is not a legally recognized method of proving handwriting in court. Therefore, the correct choice is (D), which combines (A) and (B).

Step 3: Final Answer:
Handwriting can be proved both by the opinion of experts (Section 45) and by the evidence of a person acquainted with the handwriting (Section 47).