RISHAJ Vs. JIJU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner stands indicted for offence punishable under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in C.C. No. 2875 of 2013 on the file on the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, No. II, Thrissur, instituted on the basis of the complaint filed by the first respondent herein. Anx. A is the copy of the impugned complaint, which has led to the institution of C.C. No. 2875 of 2013 on the file of the above-said Trial Court. The alleged dis-honored cheque dated 24/12/2012 is for Rs. 26 lakhs. It is stated that as per Anx. A complaint, the allegation is that a huge sum of Rs. 26 Lakhs was borrowed by the petitioner from the first respondent herein for his personal purposes. The specific plea taken up by the petitioner herein is that he had business transactions with one Sri. Satheesh Venugopal, and when the relationship between the petitioner and the said person had run into troubled waters, the instant prosecution has been launched by the first respondent herein, as a name lender of the said Sri. Satheesh Venugopal by misusing the blank signed cheque leaf of the petitioner. It is a case of the petitioner that the petitioner and Sri. Satheesh Venugopal were doing some business together and that he had access to the petitioner's cheque book and stealthily removed the said cheques of the petitioner without his knowledge as he was then abroad. That the petitioner was then in a Gulf Country and the petitioner came to know about the loss of the cheque only when the instant complaint was launched. Thereupon, the petitioner is said to have immediately preferred Anx. E complaint dated 02/08/2014 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thrissur, against the first respondent herein and the above said Sri. Satheesh Venugopal, stating that they had committed forgery and cheating, etc. in relation with the above said cheque. Anx. F FIR dated 19/08/2014 in Crime No. 1565/2014 of Thrissur West Police Station was registered, whereby, offences punishable under Sections 379, 420, 465, 468, 471 read with Sec. 37 of the Indian Penal Code were registered against the first respondent herein and Sri. Satheesh Venugopal as accused persons therein. After completion of the due process of the investigation the police had filed final report/charge sheet in Crime No. 1565/2014 indicting the first respondent herein and said Sri. Satheesh Venugopal for the above said offences and the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thrissur has taken cognizance of the offences therein, which has led to the institution of C.C.No. 166/2016 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thrissur, in respect of Anx. F crime. It is further stated that in the course of the investigation of Anx. F crime, the cheque in question involved in that crime (which is the same as the one involved in the present Anx. A complaint for Sec. 138 offence), was sent for the expert opinion of handwriting analysis of the Forensic Science laboratory concerned and that Anx. G is the report submitted by the Assistant Director (Documents), Regional Forensic Science Laboratory, Thrissur dated 04/10/2016 in crime No. 1564/2014, of Thrissur Town West Police Station, wherein it has been stated that the sample hand-writings of the petitioner along with the questioned document (Cheque in question), was sent for handwriting analysis and it is stated in Anx. G report of the Forensic Science laboratory, Thrissur as follows (see pages 38 and 39 of the present paper book). The questioned signature in this case was carefully and thoroughly examined and compared with standard signature in all aspects of handwriting identification and detection of forgery with scientific aids in the Regional Forensic Science laboratory at Thrissur. The result of examination is the following.

(2.) The person who wrote the blue enclosed standard signatures stamped and marked A1 and S1 to S30 did not write the red enclosed questioned signature similarly stamped and marked Q1. The questioned document in this case was carefully and thoroughly examined and compared with standard documents in all aspects of handwriting identification and detection of forgery with scientific aids such as Han Magnifiers, Zoom Stereo Microscope, Video Spectral Comparator (VSC 5000) in the Regional Forensic Science laboratory at Thrissur. The red enclosed questioned item marked Q1 consist of signature in a cheque bearing number '674970' dated 24/12/2012 pf Corporation Bank, branch Round North, Thrissur. This questioned signature is some what slowly written. The standard item supplied for comparison and stated to be written by Sri. Rishab consist of specimen signature in three sheets of paper obtained on 15/09/2014 marked SI to S30 and signatures written in the normal course in a cheque dated 14/07/2012, marked A1. These standard signature are freely written with natural variation and are found to be consistent among themselves. On comparison, the questioned signature shows signs of forgery such as hesitating movement of strokes, pen halt and pen lifts at unnatural places, imitated letter formations, wrongful formation of characters etc. The questioned signature also shows, significant differences in writing characteristics from the standards. Some of the individual writing characteristics in which they differ are the following.

(3.) Though notice has been duly served on R-1 (complainant), there is no appearance for that party.