Chapter XXIII
Section 292 CrPC: Evidence of officers of the Mint
New Law Update (2024)
Section 320 BNSS
TRIAL COURT
Punishment
Procedural – Investigation / Inquiry
Cognizable?
Bailable?
Compoundable?
Bare Act Text
(1) Any document purporting to be a report under the hand of any such officer of any Mint or of any Note Printing Press or of any Security Printing Press (including the officer of the Controller of Stamps and Stationery) or of any Forensic Department or Division of Forensic Science Laboratory or any Government Examiner of Questioned Documents or any State Examiner of Questioned Documents, as the case may be, as the Central Government may, by notification, specify in this behalf, upon any matter or thing duly submitted to him for examination and report in the course of any proceeding under this Code, may be used as evidence in any inquiry, trial or other proceeding under this Code, although such officer is not called as a witness.
(2) The Court may, if it thinks fit, summon and examine any such officer as to the subject-matter of his report: Provided that no such officer shall be summoned to produce any records on which the report is based.
(3) Without prejudice to the provisions of sections 123 and 124 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872), no such officer shall, except with the permission of the General Manager or any officer in charge of any Mint or of any Note Printing Press or of any Security Printing Press or of any Forensic Department or any officer in charge of the Forensic Science Laboratory or of the Government Examiner of Questioned Documents Organisation or of the State Examiner of Questioned Documents Organisation, as the case may be, be permitted-
(a) to give any evidence derived from any unpublished official records on which the report is based; or
(b) to disclose the nature or particulars of any test applied by him in the course of the examination of the matter or thing.
Important Sub-Sections Explained
Section 292(1)
This sub-section allows reports from specified government experts, such as those from forensic labs or the Mint, to be directly used as evidence in court without requiring the officer who prepared the report to be physically present and testify as a witness. This provision helps streamline the evidentiary process for expert findings, saving valuable court time.
Section 292(2)
Despite the general rule of admissibility without a witness under sub-section (1), this provision grants the court the power to summon and examine the expert if it believes their testimony is necessary to clarify the report or for any other reason, ensuring judicial discretion to seek further details when needed. However, the expert cannot be compelled to produce the confidential records on which the report is based.
Landmark Judgements
State of H.P. v. Ganesh Dass, 2011 SCC OnLine HP 4070:
The Himachal Pradesh High Court elucidated that the report of a Government expert under Section 292 CrPC is admissible in evidence without necessarily examining the expert, but the Court retains the discretion to summon and examine the expert if deemed necessary for clarity or further inquiry into the subject matter of the report.
Pramod Kumar Gupta v. State of U.P., 2017 SCC OnLine All 1605:
The Allahabad High Court reiterated that Section 292 CrPC provides for the admissibility of expert reports, and while the expert is generally not required to be called as a witness, the court’s power under sub-section (2) to summon and examine the expert is discretionary and can be exercised to ensure a fair trial, but without compelling the production of underlying records.