A. INAYATHULLAH Vs. A. RAMESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Request of the petitioner to refer the disputed cheque dated 18.02.2013 to the Director, Central Forensic Science Laboratory, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh, to find out the age of the signature, has been rejected, vide order made in Crl. M.P. No. 2070 of 2014 in C.C. No. 77 of 2013 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate (Fast Track Court), Vellore District dated 02.12.2014 and that the same is impugned in this Criminal Revision Case on the grounds inter alia that the Court below has failed to consider the petitioner's case that he has not issued the cheque to the respondent and from the very beginning, the petitioner has denied issuance of the cheque. Reliance is placed on the decision in Elumalai v. Subramani, 2011 3 CTC 616this Court held as follows:

(2.) Let me consider some of the decisions of this Court on the above issue.

(3.) Judgment in Elumalai v. Subramani , has been rendered in the year 2011. However in a decision in Panneerselvam v. S. Bakkiam, when a similar request was made by the petitioner therein, arising out of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (26 of 1881), following a previous decision of this Court in R. Jagadeesan v. N. Ayyasamy , a learned Single Judge of this Court, dismissed the revision petition. Short facts in Panneerselvam v. S. Bakkiam are as follows: