Judgment Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.-Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner. 2. It is contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that by the order of the trial Court the specimen of handwriting of the prosecutrix was sent for comparison to the Forensic Science Laboratory. After that order the Court is required to consider the report in the trial for final adjudication. It is also contended that in the order dated 04.02.2006, it is observed by the learned trial Court that if FSL report will not be received in the Court before 09.04.2006, the Court will not wait for the report. The apprehension of the petitioner is that if FSL report will not come, then learned trial Court will not consider the same. 3. In the interest of justice, it is ordered that once the Court has passed an order for sending the specimen signature of prosecutrix to the FSL, then the Court is under an obligation to consider the FSL report. The prosecution is also under an obligation to produce the same after due analysis expeditiously. Therefore, the learned trial Court is directed not to decide the case without considering the FSL report. In the interest of justice the Director, Forensic Science Laboratory, Jaipur is directed to send the report of specimen signature after due examination in accordance with law on priority basis. 4. With these observations, the petition stands disposed of .