KALAISELVI Vs. A. SIVASUBRAMANIAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGING the impugned order passed in Crl.M.P.No. 316 of 2008 in S.T.C.No. 2880 of 2007 dated 11.04.2008 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No. 4, Tirunelveli, the present revision has been filed.

(2.) THE learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the revision petitioner is an accused in S.T.C.2880 of 2007 and after the questioning of accused under 313 of Cr.P.C., the accused filed an application in Crl.M.P.No. 316 of 2008 for sending the cheque in question for Forensic Department for comparing the writings. The said application was dismissed stating that with a view to drag on the proceedings, that application was filed. Against the said order, the petitioner/accused has come forward with this revision.

(3.) RESISTING the same, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent would submit that once the signature in an instrument is admitted, it is the duty of the accused to prove that to whom he has handed over the same. Furthermore, he would submit that as per Section 20 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, the accused only has authorised holder to fill up the cheque and hence, there is no question of sending the document for comparison. To prove the same, he relied on a decision of this Court in S. Gopal Vs. D. Balachandran reported in : 2008(1) MWN (Cr.) DCC 33.