Hello, 

Yes the IO can do so. 

You are the accused or the complainant. 

Send the same to the police station by means of post, so that if the same is not considered then you may go for quashing of the charge sheet at the later stage. 

Regards 

Hello,

Where there is not sufficient infrastructure to conduct certain test only in that case a Pvt body can be approached.

Regards

If IO is not willing to accept the evidence provided by the complainant, he can either seek for further investigation by filing a petition under section173(8)cr.p.c. after the charge sheet is filed or he can produce the same at the time of adducing his evidence during prosecution witness stage.

You cannot get citations of this particular event, you can adopt the steps suggested in the previous post.

The citation will not make any difference to IO, hence don't strain on it.

1) the punjab and haryana HC   has in case of chamkaur singh v/s Mithu singh directed list of handwriting and finger print experts be drawn who are qualified and skilled in practice 

2) the State govt should check their  qualifications  and credentials  and confirm their credibility

3) regulatory authority  be established to deal with situations when there is conflict of opinion among experts 

4) I0 cannot refuses to accept report of private forensic labs 

it would be appropriate to mention that often a court is faced with conflicting opinions given by handwriting experts. The spirit of Sections 45 and 47 of the Act is that the expert whose opinion is sought on a questioned document, should indeed be an expert/skilled person in the field concerned. In Indian Kumar Parveen 2013.11.13 14:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh Courts, the procedure is adversarial as opposed to the inquisitorial. The role of a Judge is to preside over the proceedings and rule on the points of law. The expert's overriding duty is to the Court, not to who call him. The opinion of the expert is very important and the court has to determine the lis keeping in view his opinion. Any lapse or mistake due to lack of skill by the expert can lead to grave and manifest injustice to a party. Keeping this in view, this Court is of the opinion that since the opinions of handwriting and fingerprint expert who examine the questioned documents, thumb impressions, signatures, forged documents etc. is very important and has a direct bearing on the credibility of evidence. The need of hour is to control, regulate, certify, accredit and devise means for registering expert witnesses who appear in Courts. The Departments of Justice and Home Affairs of the respective States of Punjab, Haryana and Union Territory, Chandigarh are directed to delve deep in the field and come out with viable mechanism to facilitate the justice dispensation by remedying the prevalent maladies/handicaps in system and the responsible officer of the Departments of Justice and Home Affairs of the respective States of Punjab, Haryana and Union Territory, Chandigarh should file affidavits of compliance within three months as far as proposed action on their part is concerned and prepare list of fingerprint and handwriting experts or forensic questioned documents examiners, who are qualified and skilled to practice this profession on full time basis. The State Governments should check their qualifications and credentials and confirm their credibility in this field.  A register of such practitioners should be drawn and rules be framed. A Code of ethics and conduct for their working should also be framed. Besides this, regulatory authority comprising of qualified concerned registered professionals and others related to field be also established to deal with the situations where there are conflicting opinions of experts and the consensus opinion of the Board of experts under the supervision of expert regulatory authority should be binding on the contesting parties.

Sir give the copy of reports along with the letter to IO , see IO can refuse the private report in that case you need submit same as evidence before court then it will be upon court to accept same or deny.

In Suraj bhan vs.Dinesh kumar the delhi high court held private repotr is admissible in court.

Citation

Mr Vinaykumar B Haddannavar

vs

The State Of Karnataka on 8 February, 2018

Dear Sir,

Better go for quashing of FIR on the basis of such three reports High court may quash the FIR.  You cannot insist either IO or trial court to accept such reports but they can be assisting them in arising a conclusion.