PRABHAKAR XEMBHU Vs. SURENDRA V PAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short question for consideration before this Court is whether the exercise of discretion by the learned J.M.F.C. in rejecting the application dated 11-3-2005 is proper and legal

(2.) To answer the said question a few facts are required to be stated. The applicant herein is the accused in C.C. No. 412/OA/04/B in which he is being prosecuted by the respondent/Complainant under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (Act, for short) for bouncing of two cheques in the sum of Rs. 3,35,000/- and Rs. 60,000/- dated 4-12-2003 and 4-7-2004 respectively. The applicant/accused did not deny that he had signed the said two cheques but it was his contention that the body of the cheque or the remaining particulars were not written by him. Likewise, it was his contention that he had not signed the A.D. card of the statutory notice sent to him by the Complainant.

(3.) After the statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Code, for short), the accused filed an application dated 11-3-2005 praying therein that the said two cheques be sent to the handwriting expert (Government Examiner of Questioned Documents) at Hyderabad along with the specimen writings of the accused to find out whether the writings on the said cheques are really of the accused or not. Likewise, the accused also prayed that the signature on the A.D. card may also be sent for comparison to find out whether the signature therein was really that of the accused. Admittedly, the said application was filed under Section 254(2) of the Code.