MEHAR SINGH THAKUR Vs. JAI PARKASH CHAUHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for setting aside the order dated 29.1.2005 whereby learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Rohru has rejected the application of petitioner under Section 73 of the Indian Evidence Act for sending the handwritings signatures of respondent alongwith questioned documents to handwriting expert for comparison.

(2.) The petitioner is facing proceedings initiated by respondent on the basis of complaint filed by him under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881. The petitioner had filed an application dated 18.12.2004 under Section 73 of the Indian Evidence Act (for short Act) stating therein that in the defence evidence cheques Ex.DW1/B, Ex.DW1/C, Ex.DW1/D have come on record. Ex.P-1 is also on record. The perusal of said cheques indicates that names of persons as well as signatures on the cheques Ex.DW1/C and Ex.DW1/D have been written and signed by one person which are in consonance with the signatures and handwritings on cheque Ex.DW1/B and another cheque Ex.P-3. This has been done by Jai Parkash complainant. It has also been stated that aforesaid documents require comparison by learned Court or handwriting expert after obtaining the handwritings of Jai Parkash. In the end, prayer has been made for allowing the application. The application has been contested by respondent by filing the reply. The learned Sub divisional Judicial Magistrate has dismissed the application on 29.1.2005.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record. The evidence of the complainant in the case is over. The statement of petitioner has also been recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. The petitioner has examined three witnesses in defence. DW- 1 Agya Ram is an employee of the UCO bank, Rohru. DW-2 Jagdish Singh son of Gulat Ram is the real brother of complainant, he has stated that cheques Ex.DW1/D and Ex.DW1/C do not bear his signatures. DW-3 Jadish Chand son of Karam Singh has been examined by petitioner in order to prove that when accounts were settled, two cheques were issued which are Ex.DW1/D and Ex.DW1/C. An amount of Rs.25,000/- was already paid to petitioner vide Ex.DW1/B. In the cross-examination of the respondent cheque No.867881 and cheque No.867882 were put to him and he denied that such cheques were given to him.