Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CHITTARANJAN DASH
Nabakishore Barik – Appellant
Versus
Brahmahari Shankar Dash – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts related to loan and cheque issuance. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments regarding fairness of trial and expert examination. (Para 3 , 6) |
| 3. court's analysis of section 73 of the evidence act. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. supreme court's guidance on expert examination. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. conclusion allowing the examination of an expert. (Para 9 , 10) |
Judgment :
1. By means of this application, the Petitioner seeks to set aside the order dated 29.08.2023 passed by the learned J.M.F.C., Jajpur Road in 1CC Case No.76 of 2022.
3. Perused the impugned order dated 29.08.2023, the learned court while rejecting the prayer of the Petitioner held as follows:-
Copy served. Heard on the petition. Perused the case record, petition and other connected documents. It is found that the case is at the stage of recording of evidence. The complainant P.W.1 had already been examined and exhibit i.e. the cheque was marked as Ext.P-1/P.W.1 without any objection from the opposite side. The signatures of the accused which were marked as Ext.P-1¹ and Ext.P-12 were marked without objection. It was found that the cheque was returned vide cheque return memo marked as Ext.P-2 with endorsement of “Funds Insufficient” and
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 court emphasized the importance of independent expert testimony for establishing signature authenticity in forgery claims.
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 be allowed to present expert evidence when claiming misuse of a cheque to ensure a fair trial.
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 accused has the right to present evidence to challenge the validity of a cheque, particularly when allegations of misuse are made.
The court established that the refusal to appoint a handwriting expert constitutes a jurisdictional error as expert evidence is essential for determining the authenticity of documents in a money suit....
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
