BASANAGOUDA Vs. SHASHIKANT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition f i led under Section 482 Cr.P.C., call ing in question the legality and val idity of the order passed on 28.11.2017 rejecting IA No.1 f iled under Section 45 of Evidence Act in C.C.No.6 of 2016 by the learned Civi l Judge and JMFC, Mudalagi.

(2.) Brief facts are that, the present petitioner is the complainant in proceedings initiated under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short, herein after referred' to as N.I. Act) before the learned Civi l Judge and JMFC, Mudalagi, which is currently pending in C.C.No.6/2016. The respondent herein is the accused in the said case. The case of the complainant is that, some time prior to 2010, through a series of loan advances made, he had in al l given a sum of Rs.2,80,000/- to the respondent and towards repayment of the same, the accused had issued a cheque for Rs.2,80,000/- dated 23.01.2010, which upon presentation before the banker was returned dishonoured. A notice was duly issued by the petitioner herein and respondent issued a reply notice as per Ex.P.8, essential ly contending that he had indeed taken loan of Rs.40,000/- in the year 2009 from the complainant and not Rs.2,80,000/- as demanded and he had returned the same after about six months and the petitioner had passed a valid receipt in that behalf which is marked as Ex.D.1 before the learned Court below.

(3.) It is contended before me by the learned counsel for the petitioner that his appl ication I.A.1 fi led under Section 45 of the Evidence Act has been rejected by the learned trial Court on impermissible grounds and therefore, it is liable to be set aside. In this behalf, he submits that the petitioner has denied the signature appearing on Ex.D.1 and, therefore the Court should have al lowed the appl ication and referred Ex.D.1 for the examination of an expert to ascertain the genuineness and authenticity of the signature borne on Ex.D1. He submits that this petition is entitled to be al lowed and order of the learned Court below on I.A.1 is l iable to be set aside and Ex.D.1 referred to an expert for examination of the disputed signature. In this behalf, learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance on the fol lowing decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India :