Back
ARUN MONGA
Hansraj S/o Amraram – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP – Respondent
ORDER :
ARUN MONGA, J.
1. Aggrieved against the revision court order dated 05.04.2024 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sujangarh, District Churu, upholding an order dated 20.12.2023, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Bidasar, District Churu in Criminal Complaint case No.88/2021, whereby application preferred by petitioner seeking hand writing expert’s opinion under Section 45 of Indian Evidence Act read with Section 293 Cr.P.C. was rejected.
2. Respondent No.2/complainant has filed a criminal complaint against petitioner for dishonor of a cheque under Section 138 of N.I. Act stating that the cheque was issued by petitioner in discharge of a loan liability.
3. The petitioner submitted an application seeking expert opinion on the cheque signature and amount entry/hand writing thereof. Petitioner states that he neither took loan from respondent firm nor helped anyone to get loan from the respondent firm nor issued any cheque to the complainant firm. The petitioner states that respondent firm conspired with a person named Shyam Sundar to forge the cheque in question.
3.1 It is submitted by the petitioner that he never gave cheque in question to respondent firm in lieu of an
The court established that a defendant in a cheque dishonor case can seek expert evidence to rebut the presumption of issuance in discharge of a debt, particularly when claiming forgery.
A cheque's validity remains intact despite entries by a third party unless proof shows lack of intention by the drawer regarding those entries.
A party's right to a fair trial includes the ability to challenge evidence through proper legal procedures, particularly concerning disputed signatures in cheque dishonour cases.
The liability of the drawer of a cheque and the presumption in favor of the holder under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
An accused has the right to present evidence to challenge the validity of a cheque, particularly when allegations of misuse are made.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the accused's right to a fair trial, entitlement to lead evidence to prove innocence, and the provisions of Section 243 of the Code of Criminal ....
Accused must prove that a signed cheque was not issued in discharge of a debt, as merely admitting the signature imposes the burden of proof under Section 139 of the NI Act.
The accused has the right to rebut the presumption of a legally enforceable debt and must be granted an opportunity to adduce evidence in rebuttal, including the examination of a handwriting expert.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
