Back
G. S. AHLUWALIA
Ram Avtar Shrivastava – Appellant
Versus
Mahesh Sharma – Respondent
ORDER
1. This application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed against the order dated 29/12/2021 passed by First Additional Sessions Judge, Gohad, District Bhind in an unregistered Criminal Revision No......../2021, by which the revision filed by the applicant against the order dated 2/12/2021 passed by JMFC, Gohad, District Bhind in RCT No.110/2013 has been rejected as not maintainable.
2. The facts of the case are that the applicant is facing trial for offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. It appears that the applicant moved an application for sending the disputed cheque to the handwriting expert for examination of his signatures. The said application was allowed by order dated 14/2/2018. The respondent being aggrieved by the said order preferred a revision, which was registered as Criminal Revision No.3/2018, and the said revision was dismissed by order dated 12/9/2019 on the ground that the order under challenge is an interlocutory order. Furthermore, it was also observed that no valuable right of the respondent was violated by the Trial Court by passing the order dated 14/2/2018. Thereafter, it appears that the applicant filed another application
The drawer of a cheque authorizes the holder to fill-up the other entries, and the penal provisions of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act would be attracted if the cheque is otherwise vali....
The admission of signatures on disputed cheques establishes liability, and it is not legally required that the cheques should be filled by the person who signed them.
The authority of the holder in due course to complete stamped instruments and the lack of a mandate for the drawer to fill up the entire instrument by himself.
A cheque signed by the drawer authorizes the payee to complete the instrument, affirming liability unless disproven. The court emphasized the presumption of consideration under the Negotiable Instrum....
A belated plea for examining the writing in a disputed cheque cannot be entertained at the revisional stage, especially when it was not the plea before the trial court.
A cheque does not need to be in the handwriting of the drawer for it to be valid under the Negotiable Instruments Act.
The court emphasized the necessity of sending a disputed cheque for forensic examination to ascertain signature authenticity, ruling that the trial court's order was not merely interlocutory and thus....
The admission of the respondent's signature on the cheques made the appointment of a handwriting expert unnecessary.
The court ruled that a trial court's order denying signature verification on a disputed cheque is not merely interlocutory and can be challenged in a revision petition, emphasizing the right to a fai....
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
