The Delhi High Court has ruled that courts cannot compare handwriting samples of parties without first informing them and giving an opportunity to respond, stressing that such actions violate principles of natural justice. The ruling came while setting aside a divorce decree granted by a family court on grounds of cruelty.
A bench of Justices Vivek Chaudhary and Renu Bhatnagar observed that the trial court had adopted a flawed approach by independently comparing handwriting under Section 73 of the Evidence Act without disclosing its intent or seeking expert assistance.
High Court finds family court’s approach flawed
The case stemmed from a matrimonial dispute where the husband had alleged cruelty and relied on a handwritten note purportedly authored by his wife. The family court had directed both parties to provide handwriting samples and later concluded, based on its own comparison, that the document was written by the wife. It also drew an adverse inference from her hesitation in giving the samples. However, the High Court held that this process lacked transparency and fairness. It noted that the parties were not informed that their samples would be used for comparison, nor were they given a chance to contest the findings.
Also Read | Biometric voting in India? Supreme Court agrees to examine proposal
Emphasis on fair procedure and limited use of powers
The bench clarified that while courts do have the power to compare handwriting under Section 73, such an exercise must be used sparingly and with caution. It stressed that procedural fairness requires parties to be aware of how evidence is being evaluated. The court also pointed out that expert opinion could have been sought to support such analysis, but no such step was taken. It remarked that the trial court’s method appeared to lean towards a predetermined conclusion rather than an objective assessment of facts.
Also Read | Delhi court refuses bail in sexual assault case, cites seriousness of charges
Divorce decree set aside
In its ruling, the High Court held that reliance on the handwritten document was legally untenable. It further found that other allegations of cruelty were not supported by sufficient evidence and that the burden of proof had been improperly shifted. Accordingly, the court allowed the wife’s appeal and set aside the divorce decree granted under the Hindu Marriage Act, reinforcing the importance of due process in judicial proceedings.
