ASHA JOSE Vs. JAYAKRISHNAN AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Accused in ST. No. 112/2012 of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Karunagappally has filed this application challenging the order in Crl.M.P. No. 14/2013 of that court under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(2.) It is alleged in the petition that the case was taken on the basis of a private complaint filed by the first respondent alleging that the petitioner had committed the offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The allegation in the complaint was that the petitioner borrowed a sum of Rs. 2,50,000/- and in discharge of that liability, he had issued the disputed Ext.P1 cheque, which when presented was dishonoured for the reason funds in sufficient and in spite of notice issued, he had not paid the amount. But he had sent a reply with false allegations. So according to the complainant, the petitioner had committed the offence punishable under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

(3.) When the petitioner appeared before the court below, the particulars of offences were read over and explained to her and she pleaded not guilty. Thereafter, in order to prove the case of the complainant the complainant himself was examined as PW1 and the documents including the cheque Ext.P1 were marked. According to the petitioner, when the complainant was cross examined, he had admitted that entries in the cheque were in the handwriting of the petitioner and it was written in his presence and singed in his presence and delivered to him. So, in order to prove that the handwriting in Ext.P1 cheque was not that of the petitioner. He filed Crl.M.P. No. 14/2013 for sending Ext.P1 cheque for expert opinion. The learned Magistrate by impugned Annexure-A5 order dismissed the application. Aggrieved by the same, the present criminal miscellaneous application has been filed.