GOLI SATYANARAYANA REDDY Vs. G. MAHESH AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these Criminal Revision Cases arise out of the orders passed in the petitions filed under Section 45 of the Evidence Act to send the disputed documents in the lis to the expert for examination and for his opinion.

(2.) Since common question of law whether an order passed under Section 45 of the Evidence Act is an interlocutory order attracting the bar under sub-section (2) of Section 397 Cr.P.C. to maintain a revision under sub-section (1) of Section 397 Cr.P.C. is involved in all these Criminal Revision Cases, they are taken up together for consideration of the said preliminary question relating to maintainability of revision under Section 397(1) Cr.P.C., and these Criminal Revision Cases are being disposed of by this common order.

(3.) The petitioners in all these Criminal Revision Cases are the accused in complaints filed against them for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act filed on the ground that the cheques issued by them towards discharge of legally enforceable debt or liability were dishonoured. During the pendency of the trial of the said cases, the revision petitioners have filed petitions in all the said cases respectively under Section 45 of the Evidence Act requesting the trial Courts to send the documents in question, whether the cheque or the promissory note, as the case may be, to the expert for examination either to compare the disputed signatures on the document in question with the admitted signatures or to determine the age of the ink to establish their defence taken in the respective cases.