K S ANILKUMAR Vs. P K SURESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the accused in a prosecution under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. Signature in the cheque is admitted. The notice of demand was admittedly received by the petitioner. There was no response to the notice of demand. In the course of the trial, the accused took the stand that the cheque was a signed blank cheque when it was handed over to one Jayan @ Charles. That cheque has been obtained by the complainant, who is staking a false claim, it was contended. After examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C. the accused filed an application to forward the cheque to the expert. The learned Magistrate, by the impugned order, copy of which is produced as Annex.A2, turned down the said request. The discretion under Section 254(2) Cr.P.C. was not exercised in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner has therefore come before this Court with a prayer that the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. may be invoked to set aside the impugned order and forward the cheque to the expert.

(2.) The prayer is opposed by the learned counsel for the complainant. The learned counsel for the complainant submits that the petitioner does not have a consistent case at all and that in these circumstances it is not necessary to interfere with the impugned order at this stage.

(3.) I must alertly remind myself of the nature, quality and contours of jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. That is an extra ordinary jurisdiction which is to be invoked only in exceptional cases and that too only to advance the interests of justice. Such jurisdiction has not to be invoked as a matter of course even when the court feels that an error in law or facts has been committed by the trial Court. The law frowns upon an attempt to challenge interlocutory orders which will unnecessarily protract the proceedings. This policy of law is reflected in Section 397(2) Cr.P.C. where there is an embargo against challenge against interlocutory orders in revision. Ordinarily and normally therefore such interlocutory orders must wait for their challenge till the final orders are passed in the proceedings. If necessary, such orders like the impugned one can also be challenged along with the final order to be passed.