Forensic lab

The trial of the case completed?  Every one have rights to appeal the case

Please do not assume things.  The Forensic Labs follow a procedure that rules out such influences or irregularities.  The samples never labeled with names and given unique numbers known only to one or two superiors, and the samples sometimes are divided into two or three packets and sent to different scientists for analysis, and they check both results.   The bloodstains, the sperm traces, the strands of such hair, etc can not be managed in normal circumstances as different scientists examine with different codes and even the police are not aware to which FL that specific sample of the CC was sent.  The results will be given after co-relating several reports.

"we have got a hint that the forensic report has been turned into his favour".  What, exactly, is the hint you have received? How is it going to help the accused?

 

You cannot find faulty at forensic report until it is produced before the trial  court and appears to be suspicious even after the officer of the lab has been examined and cross examined.

Under the said circumstances if the court is relying upon the said report, if you have genuine doubt about the reports to be false and have substantial reasons which you rely upon to claim this report as false, you can file a petition before the concerned  trial court seeking reinvestigation by a different agency which is recognised to be legal and accepted by courts.  

The report of FSL is an inconclusive evidence for forming an opinion by the Court.

Supreme Court in a recent judgment has cited as:

"6. Expert testimony is made relevant by Section 45 of the Evidence Act and where the Court has to form an opinion upon a point as to identity of handwriting, the opinion of a person “specially skilled” “in questions as to identity of handwriting” is expressly made a relevant fact……… So, corroboration may not invariably be insisted upon before acting on the opinion of a handwriting expert and there need be no initial suspicion. But, on the facts of a particular case, a court may require corroboration of a varying degree. There can be no hard and fast rule, but nothing will justify the rejection of the opinion of an expert supported by unchallenged reasons on the sole ground that it is not corroborated. The approach of a court while dealing with the opinion of a handwriting expert should be to proceed cautiously, probe the reasons for the opinion, consider all other relevant evidence and decide finally to accept or reject it.”