Specimen handwriting during investigation cannot be compelled under Section 73 when no proceeding is pending before the court.

Section 73 of the Indian Evidence Act authorises a court to direct a person present before it to write for comparison with disputed writing, but only in the context of an existing proceeding where such comparison is needed. It does not extend to compelling an accused to give specimen handwriting or signature merely to assist investigation before trial. The Court noted that Section 5 of the Identification of Prisoners Act, 1920, which addresses measurements and photographs for investigation or proceedings, does not authorise handwriting or signature directions at the investigation stage. The appeal therefore fails.

---

---

Issues: Whether, under Section 73 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, a Magistrate can direct an accused person to give specimen handwriting or signature while the matter is still under investigation.

Analysis: Section 73 empowers the Court to direct a person present before it to write for the purpose of enabling the Court to compare the writing with disputed writings. The provision contemplates an existing proceeding before the Court in which such comparison may be necessary, and does not extend to a request made merely to assist the investigating agency in anticipation of a future proceeding. The scheme of Section 5 of the Identification of Prisoners Act, 1920, which specially deals with measurements and photographs for investigation or proceeding under the Criminal Procedure Code and excludes signature and handwriting, reinforces that handwriting directions are not authorised at the investigation stage. The earlier authorities on Section 73 did not decide this precise question.

Conclusion: A Magistrate has no power under Section 73 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 to compel an accused to give specimen handwriting or signature during investigation, and the appeal fails.

---