9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Petition under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure for setting aside order dismissing application under Section 45 of the Evidence Act for sending disputed cheque for examination by handwriting expert.
Summary: The petitioner filed a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to challenge the order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge affirming the dismissal of the application under Section 45 of the Evidence Act by the JMFC. The petitioner, facing a criminal trial under the Negotiable Instruments Act, sought to send a disputed cheque for examination by a handwriting expert, alleging that the complainant had stolen the cheques and forged the signature. The trial court rejected the application, leading to the present petition. The petitioner argued that there was a significant difference in the ink used in the signature and the writing on the cheque, warranting examination by a handwriting expert. Citing legal precedents, the petitioner contended that the right to prove the age of writings on the cheque was crucial for the defense. However, the respondent opposed the petition, asserting that the petitioner had admitted to signing the disputed cheque, invoking the presumption under Section 20 of the NI Act that the cheque was issued properly. Upon review of the documents and arguments presented, the court found that since the petitioner admitted to signing the cheque, there was no need for further examination by a handwriting expert. Distinguishing the present case from the cited precedents where the signature was disputed, the court upheld the decisions of the lower courts as just and proper. Consequently, the petition was dismissed for lacking merit.
|
