Incoming cases matched to the records

Historical reports referenced

1. 1.N(T) 1287/20CNR MHNG19-370875-2020

   Strong relevance

   RFSL Nagpur · 2020 · Ballistics

   Same division of examination (Ballistics). Shared case terminology: revolver, cartridge, bullet, murder, firing. Comparable exhibit types: calibre, revolver, fired, cartridge, indentation. Methodology already applied here: Comparison microscopy, Test firing, Walker's test / modified Griess test for nitrite.

   Methods on file: Comparison microscopy, Test firing, Walker's test / modified Griess test for nitrite, Examination for metallic lead and powder residue

2. 2.RFSL/NSK/BAL/2011/0104CNR MHNS03-989359-2011

   Strong relevance

   RFSL Nashik · 2011 · Ballistics

   Same division of examination (Ballistics). Shared case terminology: cartridge, firing, test. Comparable exhibit types: calibre, fired, cartridge, indentation, percussion. Methodology already applied here: Walker's test / modified Griess test for nitrite, Comparison microscopy, Test firing.

   Methods on file: Walker's test / modified Griess test for nitrite, Comparison microscopy, Test firing, Trigger pull and serviceability testing

3. 3.RFSL/PNE/BAL/2015/0103CNR MHPU23-382422-2015

   Strong relevance

   RFSL Pune · 2015 · Ballistics

   Same division of examination (Ballistics). Shared case terminology: cartridge, bullet, firing, test. Comparable exhibit types: calibre, revolver, working, condition, fired. Methodology already applied here: Comparison microscopy, Walker's test / modified Griess test for nitrite, Test firing.

   Methods on file: Comparison microscopy, Examination for metallic lead and powder residue, Walker's test / modified Griess test for nitrite, Test firing

4. 4.RFSL/AUR/BAL/2017/0104CNR MHAU03-179032-2017

   Strong relevance

   RFSL Aurangabad · 2017 · Ballistics

   Same division of examination (Ballistics). Shared case terminology: cartridge, bullet, firing, residue. Comparable exhibit types: calibre, revolver, working, condition, fired. Methodology already applied here: Walker's test / modified Griess test for nitrite, Test firing, Comparison microscopy. Earlier examination ended as partial result, useful for framing limitations.

   Methods on file: SEM-EDX for lead, barium and antimony particles, Walker's test / modified Griess test for nitrite, Test firing, Comparison microscopy

5. 5.RFSL/NDD/BAL/2017/0102CNR MHND07-891897-2017

   Strong relevance

   RFSL Nanded · 2017 · Ballistics

   Same division of examination (Ballistics). Shared case terminology: bullet, residue, test. Comparable exhibit types: calibre, revolver, working, condition, fired. Methodology already applied here: Test firing, Comparison microscopy, Walker's test / modified Griess test for nitrite.

   Methods on file: Test firing, Comparison microscopy, Walker's test / modified Griess test for nitrite, SEM-EDX for lead, barium and antimony particles

Methodological parallels

• ·N(T) 1287/20 (2020) applied Comparison microscopy, Test firing, Walker's test / modified Griess test for nitrite on comparable material.
• ·RFSL/NSK/BAL/2011/0104 (2011) applied Walker's test / modified Griess test for nitrite, Comparison microscopy, Test firing, Trigger pull and serviceability testing on comparable material.
• ·RFSL/PNE/BAL/2015/0103 (2015) applied Comparison microscopy, Walker's test / modified Griess test for nitrite, Test firing on comparable material.
• ·RFSL/AUR/BAL/2017/0104 (2017) applied Walker's test / modified Griess test for nitrite, Test firing, Comparison microscopy on comparable material.
• ·RFSL/NDD/BAL/2017/0102 (2017) applied Test firing, Comparison microscopy, Walker's test / modified Griess test for nitrite on comparable material.

Technology evolution notes

• Walker's test / modified Griess test (Ballistics and firearm discharge residue)

  Walker's test / modified Griess test remained in routine use until roughly 2018 as a stand-alone residue finding. It is still defensible for continuity, and current practice adds SEM-EDX for characteristic lead, barium and antimony particles, supported by the chemical test as a screen.

  Seen in R01, R4303, R2308, R4716, R1116

Indian Evidence Act and related provisions

• Section 293, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 · Reports of certain Government scientific experts

  A report signed by a listed Government scientific expert, which includes Chemical Examiners and officers of the Forensic Science Laboratory, can be used as evidence without calling the officer into the witness box. The court still has discretion to summon the officer, and the accused retains the right to ask for the expert so that the report can be tested in cross-examination.

  Why it matters: Most laboratory reports enter the record through this route. Clean documentation, an identifiable signatory with designation, intact seals and a complete exhibit register are what make the court comfortable relying on the report as it stands.

• Section 45, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 · Opinions of experts

  When a point involves specialised knowledge such as science, art, handwriting or finger impressions, the opinion of a person skilled in that field is relevant. The opinion carries weight in proportion to the reasoning and data shown behind it.

  Why it matters: The opinion paragraph should be traceable to observations, methods and instrument data recorded in the same report. A conclusion stated without the supporting steps is easy to attack.

• Section 294 CrPC, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 · No formal proof of certain documents

  If the genuineness of a document is not disputed by the other side, formal proof can be dispensed with and the document read in evidence.

  Why it matters: Where the defence admits the laboratory report, the examination proceeds without the officer attending, which shortens the trial.

Chain of custody observations

• Condition on receipt: Seals recorded as intact and tallied with the specimen seals on receipt.

Laboratory practices referenced

• · Results are reported only for the exhibits actually examined, with remnants resealed and entered in the register.
• · Method, kit or tool version, and instrument identity are recorded so the examination can be repeated or reviewed.
• · Screening tests are treated as presumptive and carried through to instrument or profile level confirmation before any opinion.
• · The signatory records name, designation and division, which is what a Section 293 report needs on its face.

Limitations and gaps identified

• ·RFSL/AUR/BAL/2017/0104 produced a partial result with reduced discriminatory power. Expect a similar ceiling if the material is degraded.