Mohinder Singh, AIR 1953 SC 415 was considered by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Gurucharan Singh, (1963) 3 SCR 585. The evidence of a ballistics expert would assume significance where direct evidence is not satisfactory, or is of interested witnesses or where nature of injuries requires expert corroboration. In other words, whether examination of a ballistics expert is necessary is dependent upon factual context as it emerges in each case. There is no inflexible rule which requires a ballistics examiner in every case where a murder is alleged to have been caused with use of a fire arm.

– Hon’ble Justice Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, Rajesh v. State of Haryana, [Criminal Appeal No. 1648 of 2019].  

They were chatting under a glowing lantern…

The obtaining of a ballistic report and examination of a ballistic expert is not an inflexible rule. It may not be fatal. If evidence tendered do not inspire confidence or suffer from glaring inconsistencies, omission to seek a ballistic opinion and examination of a ballistic expert may be fatal though.

– Hon’ble Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, Ram Singh v. State of U.P., [Criminal Appeal No. 206 of 2024] decided on 21.02.2024.