In Union Of India & Ors. vs Shri Sukhvinder on 17 December, 2024, WP(C) 17328/2024, it was held that, there is a profusion of precedential authority which holds that it is unsafe to base a conviction solely on expert opinion without substantial corroboration. This rule has been universally acted upon and it has almost become a rule of law. It was held by this Court in Ram Chandra v State of U.P.16, that it is unsafe to treat expert handwriting opinion as sufficient basis for conviction, but it may be relied upon when supported by other items of 14 (1996) 4 SCC 596 15 (1977) 2 SCC 210 16 AIR 1957 SC 381 WP(C) 17328/2024 KUMAR Signing Date:23.12.2024 20:07:41 internal and external evidence. This Court again pointed out in Ishwari Prasad Misra v Mohd. Isa17 that expert evidence of handwriting can never be conclusive because it is, after all, opinion evidence, and this view was reiterated in Shashi Kumar Banerjee v Subodh Kumar Banerjee18 where it was pointed out by this Court that an expert's evidence as to handwriting being opinion evidence can rarely, if ever, take the place of substantive evidence and before acting on such evidence, it would be desirable to consider whether it is corroborated either by clear direct evidence or by circumstantial evidence.