P.A. KRISHNAPPA Vs. A. RAGHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed by the petitioner against the order passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Vellore, in Cr.R.P.No.69 of 2010, dated 18.08.2011, confirming the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Thirupathur, Vellore District, in C.M.P.No.2680 of 2010 in C.C.No.54 of 2009, dated 16.07.2010.

(2.) The petitioner is the accused in C.C.No.54 of 2009 filed by the respondent under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. According to the petitioner/accused, his signature in the disputed cheque was fabricated and it is not his signature. Therefore, pending the calendar case, he has filed a petition before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Thirupathur, Vellore District, in C.M.P.No.2680 of 2010 for comparison of his signature with the disputed cheque in question and to get an opinion from the handwriting expert. The learned Magistrate had dismissed the said petition filed by the petitioner/accused. Against which, the petitioner/accused had preferred a revision before the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Vellore, in Cr.R.P.No.69 of 2010. The learned Principal Sessions Judge, after hearing the arguments of both sides, dismissed the revision preferred by the petitioner/accused and confirmed the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Thirupathur. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code and filed the present criminal original petition.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner/accused contended that the Courts below have, without application of mind and without following the principles, dismissed the petition filed by the petitioner/accused. It is further contended that the Courts below have erred in dismissing the petition when the signature contained in the cheque is disputed, the comparison of signature is very useful for trial. Hence, the criminal original petition has to be allowed.