Daubert standard is a set of criteria used to determine whether expert testimony is admissibility in Court. Under the Daubert standard, the trial judge serves a role as the “gatekeeper” who determines whether expert testimony is considered reputable and relevant. Similarly, the judge employs a Dubert test to verify whether the testimony of the expert is based on scientifically valid reasoning and whether it has been properly applied to the facts of the issue [1][2]. The procedure of scientific examination that fails to comply with the Daubert standard may result in the rejection of any expert testimony in the court. In the matter of footwear impression evidence examination, the evidence of footwear impression identification was first accepted in court in 1786 in the Richardson case at Kirkcudbright in Scotland [3]. Footwear impression evidence has been accepted in the US Court since the 1930s. The techniques and methods used in footwear evidence examination are widely accepted in several forensic science communities and the ACE-V methods have been described in numerous forensic journals, books, and seminars around the world. Evidence of footwear impression is regularly accepted in courts in the United States, Canada, and Europe as well as other many countries in the world but so far several Indian courts have ruled that the footprint and footwear impression evidence is a “rudimentary science” and they cannot be safely relied upon. [4][5][6]