1. Rule returnable forthwith. Heard finally by the consent of the learned Counsel for the applicant. Counsel for the respondent is absent.

2. In a pending Summary Case bearing Criminal Complaint Case No.5952 of 2010, at the instance of the Complainant, the trial Court made an order below Exh.66 on 27th March, 2012 accepting the submissions of the accused that the cheque in question was required to be examined by the Forensic Laboratory to find out the age of ink on the cheque etc. As a sequel to the said finding, the trial Court directed the accused to take hamdast and reach the same on the same day to the Forensic Laboratory at Nagpur. Needless to say that the trial Court did not first ascertain whether the expert opinion could be given by the Nagpur Forensic Laboratory or Hyderabad Laboratory and thus, putting cart before the horse, the said order came to be made. Obviously, the accused had to return back to the Magistrate with a letter from the Nagpur Forensic Laboratory saying that the said job is not done in Nagpur, but it has to done in Hyderabad. The applicant/accused then filed a pursis saying that now a fresh address from Hyderabad was obtained by him and he sh