SUNITA BISWAL Vs. H.K.PARGANIHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Complainant/Respondent herein filed a case under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter, the "NI Act") stating that the cheque issued by the accused/petitioner herein to the tune of Rs.4,00,000.00 to him was dishonoured and he has valid cause of action for prosecution of the case for offence under Sec. 138 of the NI Act. During the course of the trial, accused/petitioner filed an application under Sec. 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 for examination of the said cheque by hand-writing expert stating that though the cheque is signed by her but the other writings in the cheque i.e. name, date, amount, etc. are not filled by her. The said application was rejected by the trial Magistrate in view of Sec. 20 of the NI Act against which the accused/petitioner preferred a revision but that too was not entertained by the revisional Court being aggrieved by which this criminal miscellaneous petition under Sec. 482 of the Cr.P.C. has been preferred by her.

(2.) Mr. Uttam Pandey, learned counsel for the accused/petitioner would submit that though petitioner has admitted that her signature is present in the disputed cheque but she has not admitted to the other endorsements i.e. name, amount, etc. mentioned in the cheque as it is her case that she has never issued the disputed cheque in favour of the complainant/respondent. As such, her application deserves to be granted and the cheque has to be examined by the hand-writing expert under Sec. 45 of the NI Act.

(3.) Mr. P.R. Patankar and Mr. Vedant Bhelonde, learned counsel for the respondent would submit that since it is admitted by the accused/petitioner herself that the disputed cheque is signed by her, as such, Sec. 20 of the NI Act is attracted herein, therefore, both the Courts below are absolutely justified in rejecting petitioner's application under Sec. 45 of the NI Act to get the disputed cheque examined by a hand-writing expert.