ASHOK KUMAR SHARMA, S/O SHANTI PRASAD @ CHANDU BY CASTE BRAHMIN RESIDENT OF VILLAGE TEHRA BRAHMIN POLICE STATION UCHCHAIN DISTRICT BHARATPUR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN THROUGH P.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Sec. 482 Crimial P.C. has been filed by the accused-petitioner challenging order dated 04.02.2016 passed by Additional Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate, First Class, No.2, Bharatpur(for short 'the trial court') whereby application under Sec. 45 of the Indian Evidence Act filed by the petitioner for comparison of signatures on disputed cheques by a handwriting expert has been dismissed. Further challenge has been made to order dated 03.06.2016 passed by Special Judge, Schedule Caste/Schedule Tribe(Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Bharatpur, Rajasthan(for short 'the revisional court') whereby revision petition filed by the petitioner against the aforesaid order has been dismissed.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that both the courts below have ignored the evidence on record and wrongly dismissed the application of the petitioner. The disputed cheque was not dishonoured due to insufficient amount, but it was dishonoured with remark to refer drawer because the petitioner had already filed an application before the bank. The respondent has taken the ground in his reply to application under Sec. 45 of the Indian Evidence Act. At the time of revision against cognizance order, the revisional court observed that cheque said to be theft but the petitioner never said so in his any of the application. It is argued that refer to drawer remark would mean that there is some defect or otherwise some problem to pay the amount written in the cheque. The cheque would have been taken to the issuer of the cheque for rectification of the problem but Respondent No. 2 has not done so. It may be presumed that the drawer is not known to the bank and this may possibly happen when the drawer has used a cheque book of someone else instead of using of his own cheque book. Respondent No. 2 would have contacted the bank for meaning of remark of 'refer to drawer'. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that both the courts below have not considered the aforesaid aspects of the matter and passed the impugned orders which are liable to be quashed and set aside.

(3.) Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the petition.