PRAVEEN SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed with a prayer for issuing a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 6th August, 2010 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge XVth, Kanpur Nagar (Annexure No. 6) in Criminal appeal No. 4 of 2010, whereby application under Section 391, Code of Criminal Procedure moved by the Petitioner-Appellant for additional evidence was rejected.

(2.) In brief, the facts are that Respondent No. 2 M/s A.J. Poultry filed criminal complaint No. 171 of 2006 in the Court of A.C.M.M. Ist, Kanpur Nagar against the Petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act alleging therein that the Petitioner purchased poultry feed worth Rs. 1,43000/- on 10.7.2003 and worth Rs. 4600/- on 2.9.2003 from opposite party No. 2 and gave a cheque No. 011621, dated 25.5.2005 of I.D.B.I. Bank, branch M.G. Road, Kanpur Nagar to the complainant. The cheque was presented in the bank on 21.11.2005 at ICICI Bank, Kanpur Nagar but the cheque was dishonored with the endorsement "Account Closed". A notice was issued by the complainant to the Petitioner on 28.11.2005, which was received by him on 30.11.2005, but despite notice, the amount was not paid. The case was subsequently transferred to the court of C.J.M., Kanpur Nagar where a new number was allotted. After trial, C.J.M. Kanpur Nagar, vide judgment and order dated 11.1.2010 convicted the Petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for one year with fine of Rs. 2,95,000/- and in default to undergo further simple imprisonment for a period of three months. It was further directed that even after undergoing further sentence in default of payment of fine, the fine shall be recovered from the Petitioner.

(3.) Against the aforesaid judgment of conviction, the Petitioner filed a criminal appeal No. 4 of 2010, which is pending in the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge, Court No. 15, Kanpur Nagar. During pendency of appeal an application 14-kha was moved by the Petitioner under Section 391, Code of Criminal Procedure for getting the alleged signatures of the Petitioner on the disputed cheque compared through Bank Manager and hand writing expert on the ground that the cheque was alleged to have been issued by the accused on 22.5.2005 whereas the cheque was not issued by the accused nor it bears signatures. During defence evidence, the counsel of the accused had moved an application before the Court for verification of the signatures of the accused from the Bank Manager and, therefore, before the hearing of appeal it was necessary that signatures on the cheque be got compared through Bank Manager and a hand writing expert.