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

2010 Supreme(Mad) 227

S.NAGAMUTHU
R. Jagadeesan – Appellant
Versus
N. Ayyasamy – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:S. Jayakumar, Advocate.
For the Respondents:N. Manokaran, Advocate.

Judgment :-

Common Order:

An important question as to whether the Courts can order to send documents for Forensic opinion regarding the age of the writings and signatures on disputed documents has arisen for consideration in these revisions.

2. The respondents in these two revisions, who are the accused facing prosecution for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, filed petitions before the learned Judicial Magistrate seeking to forward the cheques in question for examination by the Director of Forensic Science, Chennai to express opinion regarding the age of the writings as well as the signatures found on the cheques. The learned Magistrate concerned allowed both the petitions. Aggrieved over the same, the petitioner, who is the complainant in those cases, is before this Court with these revisions.

3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the lower Court has allowed the petitions without having regard to the fact that there is no scientific method available in this State with the Director of Forensic Science to scientifically test and find out the exact age of any writings or signatures. He would rely on a Judgment of this Court rep









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