Indian Evidence Act, 1872 · Chapter V: Of Documentary Evidence
Section 73: Comparison of signature, writing or seal with others admitted or proved
The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 was repealed and replaced by the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 from 1 July 2024. It still applies to matters and proceedings from before that date, as the repealing law provides.
In plain words
To decide whether a signature, writing or seal is genuine, the court can compare it with others admitted or proved to belong to that person. The court can direct anyone present to write words or figures for comparison. This also applies to finger impressions.
A simplified explanation, prepared with AI assistance from the official text below and checked automatically against it for numbers and cross-references. The official text is the law and prevails over this summary. Not legal advice.
Official text
In order to ascertain whether a signature, writing, or seal is that of the person by whom it purports to have been written or made, any signature, writing, or seal admitted or proved to the satisfaction of the Court to have been written or made by that person may be compared with the one which is to be proved, although that signature, writing, or seal has not been produced or proved for any other purpose. The Court may direct any person present in Court to write any words or figures for the purpose of enabling the Court to compare the words or figures so written with any words or figures alleged to have been written by such person. [This section applies also, with any necessary modifications, to finger-impressions.]
Corresponding sections were matched by comparing the wording of both official texts, and for the IPC and BNS, also against a published correspondence table. Wording, punishments and structure often changed, so read both sections before relying on the match.
Source: India Code (Legislative Department), the text of the Act as it stood before its repeal. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 73
-
Dharmrao Sharanappa Shabadi and Others v. Syeda Arifa Parveen
Whether the impugned judgments suffer from perversity and misreading of evidence, warranting re-appreciation of evidence under Article 136 of the Constitution of India; whether the High Court is correct in reversing the…
-
Iqbal Ahmed (Dead) By Lrs. & Anr. v. Abdul Shukoor
Issue arose whether it is necessary for the appellate court to consider the pleadings of the parties before adjudicating the prayer made for leading additional evidence u/Ord. XLI r.27(1) CPC.
-
Syed Basheer Ahmed v. M/S Tinni Laboratories Private Limited & Anr.
A suit for specific performance was decreed by the trial court, which was dismissed by the High Court in appeal, reversing the judgment and decree. Whether the High Court erred in reversing the findings and the judgment…
- Court on Its Own Motion v. State
- Raj Bala & Ors v. State (Nct) of Delhi & Anr
-
Ajitsinh Chehuji Rathod v. State of Gujarat & Anr.
Appellant-accused convicted u/s.138, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, had claimed mismatch of signatures on the cheque in question. His application for comparison of the signature as appearing on the cheque through the…
- Siddharth Duggal v. State (Govt, of NCT of Delhi) & Ors
- A. Srinivasulu v. The State Rep. by the Inspector of
- Santosh @ Bhure v. State (G.N.C.T.) of Delhi
- Saurav Das v. Union of India & Ors.
- Neeraj Dutta v. State (Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi)
- Indian Overseas Bank & Ors. v. Om Prakash Lal Srivastava
- K. N. Nagarajappa & Ors. v. H. Narasimha Reddy
- Tofan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu
- Rajeshbhai Muljibhai Patel and Others Etc. v. State of Gujarat and Another Etc.
- Justice K. S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India & Ors.
- Sukhram v. State of Himachal Pradesh
- Vipin Jaiswal(A-1) v. State of A.P. Rep.By Pub.Prosecutor
- Ritesh Sinha v. The State of Utiar Pradesh & Anr.
- Ajay Kumar Parmar v. State of Rajasthan
- B.A. Umesh v. Regr.Gen.High Court of Karnataka
- Rabindra Kumar Pal @ Dara Singh v. Republic of India
- Keshav Dutt v. State of Haryana
- G. Someshwar Rao v. Samineni Nageshwar Rao & Anr. Etc.
- Thiruvengada Pillai v. Navaneethammal & Anr.
- Gaudiya Mission v. Shobha Bose & Anr.
- State Through Spe & Cbi, Ap v. M. Krishna Mohan and Anr.
- Smt. Selvi & Ors. v. State of Karnataka
- Ravinder Singh Gorkhi v. State of U.P.
- State of Haryana v. Jagbir Singh and Anr.
- Lalit Popli v. Canara Bank and Ors.
- K.S. Satyanarayana v. V.R. Narayana Rao
- Ajit Savant Majagavi v. State of Karnataka
- S. Gopal Reddy v. State of Andhra Pradesh
- Vijay @ Gyanchand Jain v. The State of Madhya Pradesh
- Sukhvinder Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab
- A. Neelalohithadasan Nadar v. George Mascrene and Others
- State of Maharashtra Etc. Etc. v. Sukhdeo Singh and Anr. Etc .. Etc.
- State of U.P. v. Ram Babu Misra
- Murari Lal S/O Ram Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh
- State (Delhi Administration) v. Pali Ram
- State of Kerala v. Mathew (M. M.) and Anr.
- Ram Narain v. State of Uttar Pradesh
- Matukdhari Singh and Others v. Janardan Prasad
- Shyamlal Mobanlal v. State of Gujarat
- The State of Bombay v. Kathi Kalu Oghad and Others
- The Management of Marina Hotel v. The Workmen