Queen-Empress vs Autal Muchi

Tottenham and Norris, JJ.—The conviction in this case must be set aside, and the fine, if realized, refunded. There is no evidence on the record to show that the packet received by the Chemical Examiner in Calcutta was the packet taken from the prisoner; the packet is traced into the hands of the Civil Surgeon and no further. We are at a loss to understand why the Civil Surgeon was not called: but even if the identity of the packet had been established, we think the certificate produced and put in at the trial was not admissible in evidence. Section 510 of the Code of Criminal Procedure enacts that a document purporting to be a report under the hand of the "Chemical Examiner or Assistant Chemical Examiner" may be used as evidence in any inquiry: the certificate in this case is signed by a person styling himself " Additional Chemical Examiner," and is of no more value as evidence than a piece of waste paper.

Serious miscarriage of justice may result from the production of certificates such as the one under discussion; the local Government may, Perhaps, move the Government of India to amend Section 510 by the insertion of the words "and Additional Chemical Examiner" therein.