Introduction
In many legal cases, judges are required to decide issues that involve technical or specialized knowledge. Matters such as forensic evidence, handwriting examination, fingerprint identification, medical findings, digital evidence, or other scientific questions cannot always be understood through ordinary knowledge alone. In such situations, the Court seeks the assistance of experts who possess specialized skills and experience in the relevant field.
The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 recognizes the importance of expert opinions in judicial proceedings. Section 39 provides that the opinion of a qualified expert is a relevant fact when the Court has to form an opinion on matters relating to science, art, foreign law, handwriting, fingerprints, or electronic evidence. Section 40 further states that facts which support or contradict an expert’s opinion may also be considered relevant. Additionally, Section 41 allows the Court to consider the opinion of a person who is familiar with an individual’s handwriting or signature when determining the authorship of a document.
These provisions highlight the important role experts play in helping courts understand complex issues and reach informed decisions based on reliable and specialized knowledge.
Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023
Section 39.
Opinions of experts.—
(1) When the Court has to form an opinion upon a point of foreign law or of science or art, or any other field, or as to identity of handwriting or finger impressions, the opinions upon that point of persons specially skilled in such foreign law, science or art, or any other field, or in questions as to identity of handwriting or finger impressions are relevant facts and such persons are called experts.
Illustrations
(a) The question is, whether the death of A was caused by poison. The opinions of experts as to the symptoms produced by the poison by which A is supposed to have died, are relevant.
(b) The question is, whether A, at the time of doing a certain act, was, by reason of unsoundness of mind, incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he was doing what was either wrong or contrary to law. The opinions of experts upon the question whether the symptoms exhibited by A commonly show unsoundness of mind, and whether such unsoundness of mind usually renders persons incapable of knowing the nature of the acts which they do, or of knowing that what they do is either wrong or contrary to law, are relevant.
(c) The question is, whether a certain document was written by A. Another document is produced which is proved or admitted to have been written by A. The opinions of experts on the question whether the two documents were written by the same person or by different persons, are relevant.
(2) When in a proceeding, the court has to form an opinion on any matter relating to any information transmitted or stored in any computer resource or any other electronic or digital form, the opinion of the Examiner of Electronic Evidence referred to in section 79A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (21 of 2000), is a relevant fact.
Explanation.—For the purposes of this sub-section, an Examiner of Electronic Evidence shall be an expert.
Section 40.
Facts bearing upon opinions of experts.—Facts, not otherwise relevant, are relevant if they support or are inconsistent with the opinions of experts, when such opinions are relevant.
Illustrations
(a) The question is, whether A was poisoned by a certain poison. The fact that other persons, who were poisoned by that poison, exhibited certain symptoms which experts affirm or deny to be the symptoms of that poison, is relevant.
(b) The question is, whether an obstruction to a harbour is caused by a certain sea-wall. The fact that other harbours similarly situated in other respects, but where there were no such sea-walls, began to be obstructed at about the same time, is relevant.
Section 41.
(1) When the Court has to form an opinion as to the person by whom any document was written or signed, the opinion of any person acquainted with the handwriting of the person by whom it is supposed to be written or signed that it was or was not written or signed by that person, is a relevant fact.
Explanation.—A person is said to be acquainted with the handwriting of another person when he has seen that person write, or when he has received documents purporting to be written by that person in answer to documents written by himself or under his authority and addressed to that person, or when, in the ordinary course of business, documents purporting to be written by that person have been habitually submitted to him.
Illustration.
The question is, whether a given letter is in the handwriting of A, a merchant in Itanagar. B is a merchant in Bengaluru, who has written letters addressed to A and received letters purporting to be written by him. C, is B’s clerk whose duty it was to examine and file B’s correspondence. D is B’s broker, to whom B habitually submitted the letters purporting to be written by A for the purpose of advising him thereon. The opinions of B, C and D on the question whether the letter is in the handwriting of A are relevant, though neither B, C nor D ever saw A write.
(2) When the Court has to form an opinion as to the electronic signature of any person, the opinion of the Certifying Authority which has issued the Electronic Signature Certificate is a relevant fact.
Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs)
Question 1:
What does Section 39 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 pertain to?
- A) The admissibility of eyewitness testimonies
- B) The opinions of experts in various fields
- C) The procedures for cross-examination
- D) The standards for physical evidence
Answer: B) The opinions of experts in various fields
Question 2:
According to Section 40 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, which of the following statements is correct?
- A) Only expert opinions are relevant in court.
- B) Facts that are not otherwise relevant can become relevant if they support or contradict expert opinions.
- C) Expert opinions are not considered relevant unless corroborated by factual evidence.
- D) All opinions are irrelevant unless presented by a judge.
Answer: B) Facts that are not otherwise relevant can become relevant if they support or contradict expert opinions.
Question 3:
What is the role of the Examiner of Electronic Evidence as mentioned in Section 39?
- A) To provide legal advice to the court.
- B) To form opinions on matters related to handwriting.
- C) To offer specialized insights into electronic or digital evidence.
- D) To authenticate signatures of witnesses.
Answer: C) To offer specialized insights into electronic or digital evidence.
Question 4:
Under Section 41, when may the opinion of a person familiar with handwriting be considered a relevant fact?
- A) When the document is a legal contract.
- B) When the opinion is validated by another expert.
- C) When forming an opinion about who authored a document.
- D) When the court decides to ignore scientific evidence.
Answer: C) When forming an opinion about who authored a document.
Question 5:
Which of the following fields is explicitly mentioned in Section 39 as a basis for experts’ opinions?
- A) Ethics in business
- B) Environmental law
- C) Foreign law and electronic evidence
- D) Family law
Answer: C) Foreign law and electronic evidence
Discover more from Forensic's blog
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
