SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2014 Supreme(Bom) 962

A.I.S.CHEEMA
Abhijeet – Appellant
Versus
Anwarkhan – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Applicant:Milind M. Patil (Beedkar), Advocate.
For the Respondent:H.I. Pathan Advocate.

Oral Judgment:

1. This Application is under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ("Cr.P.C." in brief). Admit. Heard learned counsel for Applicant and learned counsel for Respondent, finally.

2. This Application has been filed by original Accused, who is facing trial under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, being S.C.C. No.9 of 2011, pending before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Kalamnuri. In the matter, the oral evidence of the Complainant, present Respondent, was recorded. According to the Applicant, in cross-examination the Complainant deposed that handwriting on the cheque is of the Applicant-Accused and that Accused has written the same in presence of the Complainant. The Complainant denied the suggestion that handwriting of the cheque was not of the Accused. Applicant claims that he filed Exhibit 65 asking to send the cheque for opinion of the handwriting expert as handwriting on the cheque was liable to be examined by the handwriting expert.

3. The Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Kalamnuri rejected the Application Exhibit 65 by observing that perusal of cross-examination shows that it is not the case of the Accused that contents of the ch












Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top