Side View of AC Unit from outside (North)
The warehouse of a Company dealing with Logistics had got fire on April 16th, 2017.
The insurance company hired our institute to investigate the cause of fire whether it is due to malicious reason or due to any accidental/natural calamities. Our team visited the incident site and investigate the whole area to find out the reason of fire.
Front View of AC Unit
To maintain the chain of custody, the incident site was photographed; the sketches of the affected areas were made and the samples were collected from the site for further laboratory and chemical analysis.
View of the AC Unit (East)
After examining the whole incident site and samples collected from the incident site, our team opined that the electrical short circuiting due to ill maintenance of the electrical wires and circuits is the effective cause of the fire in the warehouse of the company.
Bureau of Police Research and Development (BPR&D), New Delhi appoints Premier Forensic Science Institute for creating training lessons workbooks on various topics of policing for the learners to self evaluate their learning progress on the various subjects.
In case suit no. S23/07 Dinesh Kumar Vs. Suraj Bhan Shri Pitamber Dutt Additional District Judge Tis Hazari courts, Delhi, in his final judgement has not only accepted but appreciated the Evidence of Dr. S.C Mittal and observed:
‘No incriminating material has been come out during his cross examination and the said witness has successfully passed the ACID TEST of cross examination’.
36) The defendant has also examined Dr. SC Mittal, handwriting as DW-4 who has examined the signature over the counter foil of the rent receipts Ex. PW1/3 to Ex. PW1/67 and compared the same with the Admitted Signatures of the defendant and submitted his report Ex. DW4/A. The said expert has opined that the Questioned Signatures marked Q1 to Q34, Q34 to Q36 to Q65 are forged signatures and they are not written by the same persons who wrote the Admitted Signatures marked A1 to A22 attributed to Suraj Bhan. The said witness has been extensively cross examined by the counsel for the plaintiff but he has reiterated his opinion expressed by him vide his report Ex. PW4/A.
Documents feature prominently in all manner of business and personal affairs. Almost any type of document may become disputed in an investigation or litigation. For example, a questioned document may be a sheet of paper bearing handwriting or mechanically-produced text such as a ransom note, a forged cheque or a business contract. Or it may be some material not normally thought of as a ‘document’. FDEs define the word “document” in a very broad sense as being any material bearing marks, signs or symbols intended to convey a message or meaning to someone.
Examinations and comparisons conducted by document examiners can be quite diverse and may involve any of the following:
- Handwriting (cursive / printing) and Signatures
- Typewriters, Photocopiers, Laser printers, Ink Jet Printers, Fax machines
- Chequewriters, Rubber stamps, Price markers, Label makers
- Printing Processes
- Ink, Pencil, Paper
- Alterations, additions, erasures, obliterations
- Indentation detection and/or decipherment
- Sequence Determination
- Physical Matching
A trainee must learn how to present evidence before the court in clear, forceful testimony. Fledgling examiners in the later stages of training can get a glimpse into the legal process as well as a better sense of this aspect of their work through participation in a mock trial or by attending actual court hearings to observe the testimony of qualified examiners. These are guidelines and not requirements.
Justice Newey, High Court of London Chancery Division in Case No. 5436 of 2002 between Kalvinder Singh Sandhu (Applicant) and Dr. Sukhvender Kaur (Respondent) has accepted evidence of Dr. S C Mittal and in his Judgment he writes:
“Dr Subhash Mittal, a forensic document examiner called on behalf of Dr Kaur, expressed the view that the fluorescence of documents at issue tends to confirm that they are of the dates attributed to them. Mr Gupta disputed the value of fluorescence evidence in the present context, but I do not think I can dismiss Dr Mittal’s views as clearly without foundation; and”
“With a degree of hesitation, I have ultimately concluded that Mr Sandhu’s complaints in respect of the witness statement of 1 December 2009 have not been made out to the relevant standard. Mr Sandhu is alleging very serious misconduct: the dishonest concoction of a large number of documents. In the end, I do not think the evidence is strong enough to prove such misconduct beyond reasonable doubt. In other words, I cannot feel sure that Mr Sandhu’s complaints are well-founded.”
Evidence of Dr. S C Mittal accepted and appreciated by the Justice.
This institute has been approved by Foreign Regional Registration Office (FRRO) for registration of international students for study of Forensic Science.
The Govt. of FIJI has recognised and approved this institute as a study center for its police officers.
Mr. S Jitoko, Fiji Police officer, has been nominated for 2- years advance diploma course in Forensic Science. He has completed his first semester.
One Medico Doctor from CONGO (Africa), Mr. Kibwe Wa Kibwe, has also taken admission in this institute for 1 year diploma course in Forensic Medicine and Forensic Science.