NARENDRA DHAKAD Vs. ANAND KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner herein is facing prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act before Chief Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ratlam in Criminal Case No. 1595/04. At present the criminal case is at the stage of recording defence evidence and final arguments. At that stage petitioner herein made a request to call some defence witnesses and also to get the cheque in question examined by some hand-writing expert. These two applications were dismissed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate. The order was challenged by way of a criminal revision before learned Sessions Judge unsuccessfully. Now the order passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate as well as Sessions Judge have been called in question before this Court by way of these petitions filed u/S.482 of Cr.P.C. Both petitions were heard together and are being decided by his common order.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that from the very beginning it was defence of the petitioner that the cheque in question was not given by him to the complainant/respondent and the same was given to one Ankit Kumar by him with whom he was having many transactions and the cheque was simply given by way of security. It was also part of the defence of the petitioner that the said Ankit Kumar mis-used that cheque and handed it over to the complainant/respondent who entered his name in the cheque after making material alterations in the same and then filed a false complaint. It has been submitted that in support of this defence petitioner himself has given his statement and now he wants to examine one more witness in his defence and to get the cheque in question examined by a hand-writing expert to show that there are material alterations in the cheque.

(3.) Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that right from the beginning the signatures of the cheque were not called in question by the petitioner/accused and it was admitted that the questioned cheque bears signature of the petitioner/accused. In view of this admitted position presumption u/S.139 of The Negotiable Instrument Act arises in favour of the complainant and it shall be presumed unless contrary is proved that the holder of the cheque received the cheque of the nature referred to in u/S.138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act for the discharge in whole or in part of any debt or other liability. Learned counsel submitted that the applications for giving permission to produce other defence witnesses and to get the questioned cheque examined by an hand-writing expert have been moved u/S.91 of the Cr.P.C. only for the purpose of delay in trial and no useful purpose would be served by providing any further opportunity to the petitioner for producing some more witnesses or by getting the questioned cheque examined by an hand-writing expert when the signatures are admitted.