IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.301 of 2010 1. SUKHDEO BAITHA S/O LATE BHAGIRATH BAITHA R/O HAPHICHAK, P.S. MAHUA, DISTT. VAISHALI Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HOME (POLICE), BIHAR, PATNA 2. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL (C.I.D.) BIHAR, PATNA 4. THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (C.I.D.) BIHAR, PATNA 5. THE BIHAR COMBINED ENTRANCE COMPETITIVE EXAMINATION BOARD, THROUGH ITS CONTROLLER I.A.S. BHAWAN, HABAI ADDA ROAD, BIHAR, PATNA FOR THE PETITIONER : - MR. GANESH PRASAD SINGH, SR. ADVOCATE MR. KRIPA NATH JHA, ADVOCATE FOR BCECE BOARD : - MR. VIKASH KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR THE STATE : - MR. G.N. OJHA, AC TO GA 2. ----------- 05/ 02.07.2010 Petitioner is the father of one Rani Kumari, who was an applicant for the Combined Preliminary Mains Test Examination, 2009 for admission in the MBBS course. The daughter of the petitioner appeared in the first stage preliminary examination and also second stage interview test, but as per the standard procedure of Bihar Combined Entrance Competitive Examination Board the students are required to give their specimen handwriting in an OMR form. The daughter of the petitioner when appeared before the Board for her counselling and gave her specimen signature, her handwriting in the answer sheet differed from her handwriting on OMR form. The respondent-authorities doubted it a case of impersonation, and also that the - 2 - candidate who appeared at the time of the counselling has not written the test papers. Handwritings’ samples were referred for expert’s opinion and sent to S.F.S.L. for verification. The daughter of the petitioner was given provisional admission in Anugrah Medical College on this undertaking that in case of any adverse report from S.F.S.L., her admission will be cancelled. The report of the S.F.S.L. indicated that the specimen signature and the handwriting in the test paper are of two different persons, they do not tally. Prayer of the petitioner is for quashing of the report submitted by the Police Laboratory, CID, Bihar, Patna and also to declare that his daughter Rani was eligible for admission. Counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondents 1 to 4 indicate that two trained skilled experts of the Forensic Science Laboratory have submitted report, after thorough examination of the handwritings in the main paper and the OMR, they found it to be different. The petitioner has challenged the eligibility and competence of the skilled experts of the Forensic Science Laboratory stating that they are not competent to work as an - 3 - expert. In support of this the news paper reports as well as some documents have been annexed. The provision under Bihar Police Manual has also been cited, in support of this statement in the writ application that the experts are not competent to submit such report as they have no completed and cleared their training to be declared as an expert. In the counter affidavit all allegations have been denied. It has also been stated that both experts, whose opinions have been obtained, are renowned in their field and their competence cannot be questioned. I find that the daughter of the petitioner had been provisionally given admission on her undertaking that once any adverse report will be submitted by the Forensic Science Laboratory, she will accept cancellation of her admission. In this regard she cannot go back to the undertaking given by her. There is no error or illegality in case her admission had been cancelled. So for the difference in handwriting is concerned, that has been certified by two handwriting experts. The experts are trained and their competence is recognized by the State Govt. by appointing them on their respective posts. Doubting the competence of - 4 - the experts on the basis of allegation made by the petitioner, the report cannot be quashed. The petitioner can challenge the handwriting experts’ report in a duly initiated proceeding, where he may have opportunity to examine, cross examine the witnesses and the experts themselves. At this juncture, I do not find any merit in this application. It is dismissed. Original copy of the appraisal report produced by the counsel appearing for State is being returned. DKS/ (Mridula Mishra, J.)