The Supreme Court recently drew a clear line on when Sections 45 and 73 of the Indian Evidence Act can be invoked, ruling that these provisions which allow expert comparison of handwriting and signatures apply only when the document used for comparison is an admitted one.

A bench of Justice M.M. Sundresh and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma delivered the ruling while overturning a Telangana High Court order that had permitted a forensic examination of a disputed document in a decades-old property dispute.

Background:

The case stemmed from a 50-year-old conflict over ancestral land. The plaintiff based his ownership claim on the outcome of a 1975 civil suit, while the defendants alleged that their grandfather’s signature on a written statement from that case was forged.

During the trial, the defendants asked the court to send the disputed signature for handwriting analysis under Section 45, suggesting it be compared with a signature from a 1974 court document. The plaintiffs objected, pointing out that there was no evidence proving that the 1974 signature was genuine or admitted.

The Trial Court agreed with the plaintiffs, refusing the request on the ground that the grandfather’s specimen signatures were unavailable and that old photocopies of documents from the 1970s were unfit for reliable comparison. However, the Telangana High Court later reversed that decision, allowing forensic examination “in the interests of justice.”

When the matter reached the Supreme Court, the bench emphasized that the powers under Sections 45 and 73 are not open-ended and must be applied with care. It observed:“In a suit for declaration and injunction, it is for the plaintiff to prove his case. Section 45 read with Section 73 of the Act can only be invoked for an admitted document for the purpose of comparison of signatures or handwriting.”

On that basis, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court’s order, and restored the Trial Court’s decision reaffirming that handwriting or signature comparisons must rest on authenticated and admitted documents, not uncertain or disputed ones.

Case Title: HUSSAIN BIN AWAZ VERSUS MITTAPALLY VENKATARAMULU & ORS.