A' -V IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR fC.G.1 CR.M.P.NO. t'!A-9 OF 2011- PETITIONER lA.NB..-—";-; p'enBte<w?^^--"- o^"-"iA<;'(£r' RESPONDENT Mohd. Shakil, S/o Khalil Ansari, aged about 49 years, R/o House No. 12 D, StreetNo. 33, Sector - 10, Bhilai Nagar, District Durg (C.G.) VERSUS Smt. Mustkima, W/o Mohd. Abdul Rahman, aged about 41 years, R/o House No. 11/1716, Housing Board Colony, Industrial Area, Bhilai, District Durg (C.G.) PETITION UNDER SECTION 482 OFTHE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 197^ IC—78 ^ ^1 1:d sn^i TI K-ii* wn sn^rgniw fe- ^ ^ h- *it*ieti ai<n^i ~s^ •<iww<i, sitily'ito, fsidi'Liy,< ^....^^..^.^./^..^.^y00 •3n^?r'<Rw ('^i3^<?) TOITW ^lfel 3Ilt?I pB : Hon'Ute Shrf Maatndnji Mdtaa SI»rliraata»a.J.} 15.7.2011 Shri P.P. Sahii, cour^e} Heard on adinlssion. This petition has beeiij order dated 30ft> June, 2(| against onler dated 18.10.2Cf First CIass, Diirg, has been (lUmiissed. Leamed counsel for under Sectton 138 of the petitioner has taken specific| He furfher subnaits fhat ttia1 documents to be e^Mmmedl Handwriting Expert, who a^ inatdftty to give any deGtnit^ made an application for t)< *i<<tcf<i)-< 'wwif •ff^St ihi^ii ^•sTRnsn^ for the petUaoner. filed ly &e petitioner, ^yleved ly 11, by which petitloiier's teviston 10 passed by fhe Judldal Magistrate the petitlimer subinits that the petitioner is being prosecut^d for a&eged casascasston oS otteace fegotiable tostrumente Aet and the defeace that (he cheques are foi^jed. in order to subaaiit tfaat ttte valuabte documents are foi^ed, an a^pUeation w^s made for aflowtng the by a Handwriting E&tpert, but the peared in the Court, ^tjwessed faer opinion on visiKd exaiateation and smg sent for to fhe lab<watoiy for optalon of (he Handwritin'g expert after proper examtoation, whlch was rejected. He furtder submits that on revisl&n filed, (he revision has also been disinfesed. ^^ w^" XI-HC—78 (S> ^"SEI "4|A|M'4, ^-rflyig, f°«niyy,< ~HIH<»tl S?i*)iq» ••^200 3(1^1-q^^ (Tpfg^q) iffl^I'^tl^B? wisn^i%»iw [^' •miw^ifta'ai^i z- •tii<<Id''il-f 'wreff 'ii ft<st tf^R ^afflnstl^ Learaed counsel for Ijhe petitianer subnaits (tot fhe petitioner is enttfled to de6ai4 agatost criminal ctwrges airi for that purpose interest of jus^ice demand that (he documents shoiild be allowed to be ex^mmed by Handwiltmg EKpert, if necessary by appropriate ex^tnination in laboratory, but, fhe Court below has rejected fhe a^pllcation seriously prejudlcing the petitioner's defence. Leamed counsel for fhe detttloner subaaits fhat if fhe Coiut was of the opinlon fhat the oryinal cheques cannot be aUowed to be exaiained by a private Han<|lwritii% Expert, intei«stofjustice demanded fhat fhe same ought|to have been sent for exaaaia^don of Handwriting Expert of Qovt| that a praiyer to that effect was department. He ftxrther sutnnits ?rally made to the Court below. From fhe appUcation filed|ty fhe petitioner as also fl-om ttie orders passed by the Courts be^ow, I flnd fhat fhe appllcation has been rejected by the Courts bel(|>w on the g~ound fhat fhe orignal document cannot be allowed |to be handed-ower to a priwate Handwriting Expert. However, flie ordca" does not show ttiat fhe Coiirt took Into consideration a| sent for exammation of Govt. H£|ndwrittogExpert. to whefher fhe dheque oould be &..-• ' t, J XI-HG—78 ail^l ^l R-l'W> OTI SII^IshNi'* Prareen <- '3~er ^wwi, ei'<Sw\<D, hwwy. *n*itir (h*ii<»» •m,200 an^fr TPW ('yi^'^r) wmsre sfta sii^i -?- Considering the subaii^sions made by leanaed counsel liar the petitioner that an oral <vn\^f ii*iCT('iife<2l<fat<;i< ^?3tfOT 3)1^51 'yayer was made to fhat efiBect, it ivould be pTOper for fhe p^titionea- to move an appllcatlon ta wnting l3Jefoie'Tthe Court belo|w for examination ofthe questianed documents l%>a Govt- HandtCTiting EScpert. On sueh appBcatton mpved, the Cipurt below sliall coa^der and pass appropiiate onler, keeping in natnd tha^ (he accused is entllled to defend a^lnst cnmmgl chai^es an^ interest of Justice requ»espropra' examinationofthequestionep documents by a Cknrt. Handwriting E?q)ert. Wltfa the aforesaid o1|)servations, Vhe petttion is flBalty dlsposedof. | ~————— Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge