Vivek Kumar Singh vs State Of U.P. Through Principal ...
2012 Latest Caselaw 550 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 3
 

 
Case :- MISC. SINGLE No. - 1671 of 2012
 
Petitioner :- Vivek Kumar Singh
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Through Principal Secy.Deptt.Of Medical & Ors.
 
Petitioner Counsel :- Vibhu Bhushan Kalia
 
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,K. Chandra,Sanjay Bhasin
 
Hon'ble Shri Narayan Shukla,J.

As per direction of this Court, Sri N.K. Srivastava, Finger Print Expert is present along with   Director of Finger Print Bureau and certified that both the thumb impressions are of Dr. Vivek Kumar Singh. Only the difference is that at the time of examination the  finger print of left thumb was taken out and at the time of counseling finger print of right thumb was taken out. Both were sent for verification which have been tallied  with the specimen of  thumb impression of Dr. Vivek Kumar  Singh and both the thumb impressions  are tallied. Thus,  he has  expressed  his definite opinion  in regard to thumb impressions  that these thumb impressions are of Dr Vivek Kumar Singh.

So far as photographs of the petitioner are concerned, those have not been verified as the photographs taken at the time of examination as well as counseling  have been found by the  counseling board different.

Mr Sanjay Bhasin, learned counsel for the opposite parties no. 2 and 3 informs that in the said Body  many medical experts holding  the expertise  in Forensic Science have been  the members, who have examined it and expressed their opinion which is contrary to the opinion  of expert of the finger print. Therefore, the opinion of the  counseling board cannot be ignored.

It is admitted  case of the parties that before the Counseling Board  the petitioner's different thumb impressions one of right and other  of left were  taken for examination  without  specimen of  any thumb impression. Therefore, I am of the  view that once admittedly the thumb impressions taken at the time of examination as well as at the time of counseling are different, there was no question to  tally with each other . Thus, the  Counseling Board  may be right to  form its opinion  that    the thumb impressions  do not tally,but that opinion has no bearing for the case unless those different thumb impressions would have tallied with their specimen.

 Therefore, prima facie , I am of the view that the decision of the  counseling board  dated 14 th March,2012 is unsustainable, that being so, I hereby stay operation of the same till further orders of this Court.

Ten days' time,as prayed, is allowed to  learned counsel for the respondents to file counter affidavit. List on 3.5.2012.  Appearance of the Officers  is exempted.

Order Date :- 20.4.2012/Tripathi