Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(RAJ) 30831
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI, J
VIKAS JAIN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
CRLMP / 2643 / 2018
Mr. Rahul Rajpurohit, Mr. Vikram Sharma, PP, Mr. Sanjay Nahar
Accused's right to a fair trial includes the opportunity to examine disputed evidence, such as signatures on a cheque.
Headnote:(A) Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Section 138 - Right to fair trial - The petitioner challenged the rejection of a request to send a disputed cheque for handwriting examination, asserting the accused's right to defend against allegations of forgery. The court emphasized the importance of allowing the accused to substantiate their defense, particularly regarding the genuineness of signatures. (Paras 1-3)
(B) Fair trial - The court reiterated that denying the opportunity for examination of evidence would infringe upon the accused's right to a fair trial. (Paras 3-4)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought to challenge the orders of the Special Judicial Magistrate and the Additional Sessions Judge, which denied the request to send a cheque for handwriting analysis.
Findings of Court:
The court allowed the petition, directing the trial court to send the disputed cheque and related documents to the handwriting expert for examination.
Issues: The main issue was whether the accused should be allowed to send the cheque for handwriting examination to support their defense.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the accused's right to defend themselves necessitates the examination of disputed evidence, reinforcing the principle of a fair trial.
Result: Misc. Petition allowed.
Order
09/02/2024
1. By way of filing the instant Misc. Petition, challenge is made to the order dated 08.09.2017 passed by the learned Special Judicial Magistrate, NI Act Cases No.1, Bhilwara in Case No.433/2016 as well as order dated 16.03.2018 passed by the Court of revision i.e. learned Additional Sessions Judge No.3, Bhilwara whereby the prayer made by the petitioner for sending the cheque in question to the hand-writing expert for the purpose of its examination has been rejected.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel for the respondent No.2. Perused the material available to this Court and the orders impugned as well.
3. After minutely going through the niceties of the matter particularly upon scrutiny of the signature and initial of the accused on the cheque in question, it is felt that when a defence has been raised by the accused disputing the genuineness of the writing than he should be provided an opportunity to bolster the same. Every accused has an inalienable right in his favour to take defence of a case lodged against him. Here in this case, the accused has raised serious question regarding the genuineness of the signature therefore, denial from sending the material for comparison would mean denying him from defending himself and which would not be good in view of the statutory guarantee of a fair trial.
4. After perusing the orders impugned and going through the certified copy of disputed cheque it is felt appropriate to allow the petition for sending the documents to the FSL for examination.
5. Accordingly, the instant Misc. Petition is allowed. It is ordered that the learned trial Court shall send the following documents to the handwriting expert at FSL for the purpose of examination on the following points:-
(a) The initial of the accused appended on the column of the cheque; left for filling of the amount in digit, with its comparison to the signature made at the bottom of the cheque above the firm’s name.
(b) The receipt dated 07.09.2015 shall also be sent to the FSL with the specific direction to get the signature appended on receipt be compared with the initial appended near the amount mentioned in digit over the cheque in question.
6. The learned trial Court shall prepare a forwarding letter addressing to the Director, FSL for doing all the needful with the direction to send the report back to the trial Court within a period of two months of date of its receipt.
7. In view of the above, the instant Misc. Petition and stay petition stand disposed of.
