Fingerprint Identification Is 'Exact Science', Thumb Impression Expert's Opinion More Relevant Than Handwriting Expert's: AP High Court

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that the opinion of an expert in relation to thumb impressions is more relevant than the opinion of an expert in relation to handwriting, since the science of identifying thumb impressions is an exact science that does not admit of any mistake or doubt. In doing so, the Court set aside a trial court order refusing to refer a disputed agreement of sale for expert examination of thumb impressions in a suit for specific performance.Allowing two Civil Revision Petitions, the Court observed that where the execution of a document is disputed, comparison of thumb impressions would assist the trial court in effectively adjudicating the dispute.A Single Judge Bench of Justice Subba Reddy Satti observed:"The opinion of an expert in relation to thumb impressions is more relevant than the opinion of an expert in relation to handwriting, since the opinion of an expert in relation to thumb impressions is an exact science...The trial Court dismissed both the applications on the ground that the defendants challenged the suit on the ground of limitation, which is a preliminary issue to be decided by the Court. It further held that the substantial issues are not framed before the Court, and unless the evidence adduced before the Court by the plaintiffs, for the denial or admission of documents as well as the disputed signatures or thumb impressions, the procuring of the other ancillary issues is premature. In the considered opinion of this Court, the observations of the trial Court in the light of the relief sought by the plaintiffs do not withstand legal scrutiny.This being the scientific position, coupled with the law declared by the Hon'ble Apex Court in respect of expert opinion that the science of identifying thumb impressions is an exact science and does not admit of any mistake or doubt, the trial Court ought to have exercised its jurisdiction vested in it"The dispute arose out of a suit for specific performance based on an agreement of sale. The defendants denied executing the agreement and alleged that their signatures had been forged and the document fabricated. The plaintiffs consequently filed applications seeking a direction to the first defendant to appear before the Court and give her thumb impression, and thereafter to send the disputed agreement of sale along with the admitted thumb impression to a fingerprint expert for comparison.The trial court dismissed the applications, holding that issues relating to limitation were yet to be decided and that seeking expert opinion at that stage was premature. It also observed that substantial issues had not yet been framed.The High Court found the trial court's reasoning legally unsustainable. It observed that obtaining an expert opinion on the disputed thumb impression would assist the court even if the plea of limitation were decided against the defendants and would facilitate effective adjudication of the suit.Noting that ageing may reduce the sharpness of fingerprint ridges without affecting the ridge pattern, the Court held that, since fingerprint identification is an exact science, the trial court ought to have directed comparison of the thumb impressions. Its failure to exercise the jurisdiction vested in it resulted in a miscarriage of justice, warranting interference under Article 227 of the Constitution.The High Court further held that the decisions relied upon by the respondents concerning comparison of handwriting were inapplicable, as the present case related to comparison of thumb impressions.Accordingly, the High Court allowed the revision petitions, set aside the trial court's orders and directed it to obtain the first defendant's thumb impression and send it to a fingerprint expert for comparison with the thumb impression appearing on the disputed agreement of sale.Case Title: Chappidi Ravindranatha Reddy & Ors. v. Challa Narasamma & Ors.Case: Civil Revision Petition Nos. 3196 & 3197 of 2025Counsel for the Petitioners: K. Narsi ReddyCounsel for the Respondents: Vivekananda VirupakshaClick Here To Read/Download Order

Fingerprint Identification Is 'Exact Science', Thumb Impression Expert's Opinion More Relevant Than Handwriting Expert's: AP High Court

Ritika Verma

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Ritika Verma

Fingerprint Identification Is 'Exact Science', Thumb Impression Expert's Opinion More Relevant Than Handwriting Expert's: AP High Court

Ritika Verma

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Ritika Verma

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers