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

H.R.PANWAR
Mangal Singh – Appellant
Versus
Khurana Chemicals – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioners:Dr. Sachin Acharya, Advocate.
For the Non-petitioner:Mr. M.K. Garg, Advocate.

Order

H. R. Panwar, J.—This criminal revision under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, “the Code” hereinafter) is directed against the Order dated 6.10.2005 passed by the Additional Chief judicial Magistrate No. 2, Sri Ganganagar (for short, “the Trial Court” hereinafter) in Criminal Complaint Case No. 49 of 2003, whereby the application filed by accused/petitioner seeking opinion of the handwriting expert on the cheque in question came to be dismissed by the Trial Court. Aggrieved by the Order impugned, the petitioner has filed the instant criminal revision.

2. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that though the signature on the cheque in issue has not been disputed by the petitioner but the petitioner only disputed the handwriting on the cheque whereby the amount and the name have been filed up.

3. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that in the instant case, after service of notice of dishonour of the cheque, a complaint was filed on 15.6.2002. Thereafter the Trial Court took cognizance of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (or short, “the Act” hereinafter) and framed the charge. Whe








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