VISHNU KUMAR Vs. JAGDISH PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this misc. petition filed under Sec. 482 Crimial P.C., the petitioner is challenging the order dated 11.6.2008 passed by Sessions Judge, Churu in Criminal Revision No. 128/2007 by which the learned Sessions Judge, Churu affirmed the order dated 10.9.2007 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Churu in Criminal Case No. 255/2007 whereby learned trial Court dismissed the application filed by the petitioner under Sec. 45 of the Evidence Act.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that in a case filed against the petitioner under Sec. 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, the petitioner filed an application under Sec. 45 of the Evidence Act with the prayer that cheque in question may be sent to FSL for hand writing report. The said prayer was made by the petitioner on the ground that stand of the petitioner in the proceedings is that cheque in question signed by him was lost and he published a notice in the newspaper despite that bank returned the said cheque to the complainant with the remark of in-sufficient fund instead of informing the petitioner.

(3.) In the application, filed by the petitioner under Sec. 45 of the Evidence Act, it is prayed that though the petitioner is admitting his signature upon the cheque but for the purpose of ascertaining other hand writing of the cheque, the matter may be sent to the hand writing expert. But learned trial Court dismissed the said application on the ground that the petitioner is admitting his signature upon the cheque and took defence that the said cheque was lost but Bank has returned the cheque with the report of in-sufficient funds, therefore, if the petitioner is admitting his signature upon the cheque then only on the basis of the defence taken by the petitioner, it is not necessary to send the cheque to the hand writing expert for the purpose of taking opinion for other hand writing on the cheque except the signature.