SANDEEP Vs. ABHISHEK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure (in short "CODE") has been filed against the order dated 22/09/2015 passed by IIIrd ASJ, Indore in Criminal Revision No.506/2015; whereby affirmed the order dated 14/07/2015, passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Indore in Criminal Case No.33311/2008.

(2.) Brief facts of this case are that non-applicant/complainant has filed a complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class. At the stage of defence evidence, the applicant has filed an application under Section 315 of the "Code", which was allowed and thereafter the applicant deposed that he never issued the cheque in favour of non- applicant/complainant; whereas he has executed a promissory note, acknowledgment and cheque in favour of one Mahesh. Mahesh has misused the cheque. Hence the applicant has filed an application under Section 45 of Evidence Act for examination of the cheque and other documents by hand-writing expert. Learned JMFC has dismissed the application on the ground that earlier application on the same relief has been dismissed and there is no change in the circumstances after dismissal of earlier application. Besides this, the applicant has not denied the signature on the cheque in question and other documents. Against this order, the applicant has preferred a revision. Learned IIIrd ASJ has rejected the revision and affirmed the order holding that the case is pending for defence evidence for last two years and the applicant has not denied the signature on the cheque, promissory note and acknowledgment. Besides this, Mahesh is not a party to the proceedings and there is no admitted writing or signature of Mahesh on record for comparison. Being aggrieved, the applicant has filed this petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has executed a cheque in question and promissory note in favour of Mahesh but he has misused these documents. Therefore, for fair trial, it is expedient in the interest of justice to sought opinion of hand-writing expert but the Courts below have rejected the prayer without assigning any good reason. Thus, the order of Courts below be set-aside and the applicant be permitted to examine the writing of these documents by hand-writing expert. The applicant is ready to bear the expenses.