Skip to content
Home » Jose Luis Quintanilla Sacristan v. State of U.P.

Jose Luis Quintanilla Sacristan v. State of U.P.

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 – Section 50 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 293 – Report of Forensic Science Laboratory is a public document and admissible in evidence – there is no requirement to call the Director of that laboratory to get the report proved.

The accused submitted that report from Forensic Science Laboratory is not on record, therefore, it was not proved by the prosecution that the sample sent to the laboratory was found to be charas.  Perusal of record shows that chemical examination report of Forensic Science Laboratory, Varanasi, is very much on record. The accused objected that if there is such report, it is not exhibited and, hence, it cannot be read in evidence.

As per the provision of Section 293 Cr.P.C., the report of State Forensic Science Laboratory is admissible in evidence and there is no requirement to call the Director of that laboratory to get the report proved. The report on record shows that the sample sent to it was found to be charas. The prosecution proved its case beyond any reasonable doubt and the accused has been rightly convicted and sentenced by learned trial court.

Accordingly, the appeal lacks merit and is dismissed.

Section 293 in the Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973

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.

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 757 of 2018 16.08.2021 | Jose Luis Quintanilla Sacristan v. State of U.P.| Counsel for Appellant :- Manu Sharma, Dinesh Kumar Pandey, Mohd. Kalim, Rajeev Kumar | Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

View Judgment : Hon’ble Ajai Tyagi, J.

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]