MP High Court Recalls Order Quashing FIR, Notes Failure To Consider Handwriting Expert Report
Jayanti Pahwa
1 April 2026 9:00 PM IST
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has allowed a review petition and recalled an order of the Coordinate Bench, which quashed a cheating and forgery FIR, observing that the coordinate bench failed to consider the report of the handwriting expert.
The bench of Justice Vishal Mishra observed;
"The said report is a material document which was required to be considered by the Court while dealing with the criminal case seeking quashment of FIR as the report goes to the root of the case... the petitioner has made a case for review in the matter, as the mistake on the part of the Court has caused prejudice to the petitioner by not considering the expert report submitted before the Court which has a critical significance in the matter".
The petitioner sought a review of the order passed by the Coordinate Bench of the High Court, wherein an FIR for cheating (Section 420), forgery (Section 467), using forged documents as genuine (Section 471) and forgery for purposes of cheating (Section 468) of the IPC was quashed.
The petitioner (original complainant) contended that the Coordinate bench had overlooked a crucial report of the State Examiner Questioned Documents, which indicated that the disputed signatures were forged.
The counsel for the respondent opposed the review petition, arguing that a review against an order passed under Section 482 CrPC is barred by Section 362 CrPC. It was contended that once a judgment is passed by criminal courts, the review of such a judgment can be made only for the correction of a clerical or arithmetical error.
The counsel for the petitioner argued that the case fell within recognized exceptions to the bar on review. The petitioner submitted that the investigation agency had obtained a handwriting expert's report dated March 10, 2025, which was material to the controversy as it concluded that the signatures attributed to the complaint were not genuine and were forged.
The petitioner argued that this report had been placed before the Court while passing the final judgment quashing the FIR. The petitioner submitted that he had approached the Supreme Court by way of Special Leave Petition, which was subsequently withdrawn with liberty to file a review petition before the High Court.
The bench noted that the main issue for consideration was whether the review petition is maintainable against the final order passed in the criminal proceedings, once the Court becomes functus officio after a judgment or final order is signed, in terms of Section 362 of CrPC/403 of BNSS.
Relying on the case of Vikram Bakshi vs R.P. Khosla, reiterating that although criminal courts are generally prohibited from reviewing their judgments, certain exceptional circumstances permit such exercise of power. One such exception is where a mistake on the part of the Court has caused prejudice to a party.
Therefore, the bench noted that the handwriting expert's report was a material piece of evidence that went to the root of the allegations, particularly concerning forgery of signatures. The report explicitly stated that the differences in writing characteristics were beyond natural variation and indicated different authorship, thereby supporting the complainant's case. The court observed that despite the report being placed on record, it was not taken into consideration while deciding the quash petition.
The court held that the case fell within the purview of the exception carved in the Vikram Bakshi (supra) case, as the nonconsideration of a vital document had resulted in prejudice to the complainant.
Therefore, the bench held that the review petition was maintainable and therefore allowed the review petition and recalled the order of May 19, 2025.
Case Title: Rajkumar Budhrani v State of Madhya Pradesh [RP-2454-2025]