Opinion as to hand-writing, when relevant
Section 47 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 deals with opinion as to hand-writing, when relevant. When the Court has to form an opinion as to the person by whom any document was written or signed, the opinion of any person acquainted with the handwriting of the person by whom it is supposed to be written or signed that it was or was not written or signed by that person, is a relevant fact. The Act came into force on 01 Sep 1872. Repealed by section 170 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (47 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under it.
When the Court has to form an opinion as to the person by whom any document was written or signed, the opinion of any person acquainted with the handwriting of the person by whom it is supposed to be written or signed that it was or was not written or signed by that person, is a relevant fact.
Explanation. ––A person is said to be acquainted with the handwriting of another person when he has seen that person write, or when he has received documents purporting to be written by that person in answer to documents written by himself or under his authority and addressed to that person, or when, in the ordinary course of business, documents purporting to be written by that person have been habitually submitted to him.
Illustration The question is, whether a given letter is in the handwriting of A, a merchant in London. B is a merchant in Calcutta, who has written letters addressed to A and received letters purporting to be written by him. C, is B’s clerk whose duty to was to examine and file B’s correspondence. D is B’s broker, to whom B habitually submitted the letters purporting to be written by A for the purpose of advising with him thereon. The opinions of B, C and D on the question whether the letter is in the handwriting of A are relevant, though neither B, C nor D ever saw A write.
Section 47, The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (Act 1 of 1872).
Now in the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam
BSA 41 Opinion as to handwriting and signature, when relevant Close, with changes 80%
Measured by comparing the text of the two provisions, not taken from an official correspondence table — there is no machine-readable one. See both texts side by side before relying on it.
Both regimes are live. The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force. We never redirect one to the other.
Judgments citing this section
These may be obiter dicta or a precedent, for you to study. These are the judgments where this section is quoted.
-
… Civil Judge, Tis Hazari Courts is also dismissed. It is clarified that the observations made while disposing of the present application will not tantamount to finding on merits of the case." 21. Now, as far as the opinion of an expert is concerned, it is relevant to note the provision under Section 45 and 47 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, for a better grasp on the issue: "45. Opinions of experts.––When the Court has to form an opinion upon a point of foreign law or of science, or art, or as to identity of handwriting or finger impressions, the opinions upon that point of persons specially skilled in such …
-
… The evidence relating thereto may be direct or circumstantial. It may consist of direct evidence of a person who saw the document being written or the signature being affixed. It may be proof of the handwriting of the contents, or of the signature, by one of the modes provided in Sections 45 and 47 of the Indian Evidence Act. It may also be proved by internal evidence afforded by the contents of the document. This last mode of proof by the contents may be of considerable value where the disputed document purports to be a link in a chain of correspondence, some links in which are proved to the satisfaction …
-
… The evidence relating thereto may be direct or circumstantial. It may consist of direct evidence of a person who saw the document being written or the signature being affixed. It may be proof of the handwriting of the contents, or of the signature, by one of the modes provided in Sections 45 and 47 of the Indian Evidence Act. It may also be proved by internal evidence afforded by the contents of the document. This last mode of proof by the contents may be of considerable value where the disputed document purports to be a link in a chain of correspondence, some links in which are proved to the satisfaction …
Questions about Section 47
What does Section 47 of the Indian Evidence Act deal with?
Section 47 of the Indian Evidence Act is headed "Opinion as to hand-writing, when relevant". When the Court has to form an opinion as to the person by whom any document was written or signed, the opinion of any person acquainted with the handwriting of the person by whom it is supposed to be written or signed that it was or was not written or signed by that person, is a relevant fact.
How do I find court cases under Section 47 of the Indian Evidence Act?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: IEA 47, section 47 IEA, section 47 of the Indian Evidence Act. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome.
What should I read with Section 47 of the Indian Evidence Act, and has it changed?
For anything done on or after 1 July 2024 the provision to read is BSA 41 (Opinion as to handwriting and signature, when relevant), which replaced it; conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under this section.
When did Section 47 of the Indian Evidence Act come into force?
Section 47 of the Indian Evidence Act, cited as IEA 47, came into force on 01 Sep 1872, having been enacted on 15 Mar 1872. It is no longer in force.
Other sections of this Act
- 32. Cases in which statement of relevant fact by person who is dead or cannot be found, etc., is relevant1207 words
- 14. Facts showing existence of state of mind, or of body of bodily feeling1080 words
- 92. Exclusion of evidence of oral agreement809 words
- 8. Motive, preparation and previous or subsequent conduct773 words
- 65B. Admissibility of electronic records743 words
- 3. Interpretation-clause667 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Recovered from the consolidated text published by India Code (item e51341fa-7528-4327-9a57-5d194e16db6f). This page is not a substitute for legal advice.