Back
K. MURALI SHANKAR
Jambai Hardware Stores, Rep. by its Managing Partner, S. Mohamed Yahiya, Thiruverumbur – Appellant
Versus
Prakash A. Khanna – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Criminal Revision Case has been filed under Section 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C, to call for the records in Cr.M.P.No.2 of 2021 in Crl.A.No.1 of 2020, dated 05.04.2022 on the file of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tiruchirappalli and revise the same.)
1. The Criminal Revision Petition is directed against the order passed in Cr.M.P.No.2 of 2021 in Crl.A.No.1 of 2020, dated 05.04.2022 on the file of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tiruchirappalli, dismissing the petition filed under Section 293 of Cr.P.C.
2. The petitioners are the appellants in Crl.A.No.1 of 2020 on the file of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tiruchirappalli and accused in S.T.C.No.201 of 2018 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Tiruchirappalli.
3. The respondent is the complainant and he filed a private complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C., against the petitioners for the alleged offence under Section 138 of N.I. Act.
4. The learned Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Trichy, after conducting trial, has passed a judgment, dated 25.11.2019, convicting the petitioners/accused for the offence under Section 138 of N.I. Act and sentenced the first
There is no scientific method to determine the age of the writing or ink, as established in previous decisions.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that ink age tests are not reliable or of practical use in determining the date of writing, as evidenced by conflicting expert opinions and previou....
Determining the age of ink on a document does not assist in establishing its validity when the signature is not disputed, as held under Section 45.
The absence of scientific methods to ascertain the age of ink invalidates applications to examine promissory notes for evidentiary purposes, emphasizing the need for substantive proof in legal procee....
Promissory Note – Mere determination of age of ink/writing by an expert will not clinch the issue as to when exactly maker has written/signed document.
A cheque issued for repayment establishes liability under Section 138 of the N.I. Act; the burden to rebut the presumption of liability lies with the accused, who failed to provide sufficient evidenc....
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
