1 2004.11.wp-- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY. APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2004 OF 2011 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2005 OF 2011 Sanjay Jaysingrao Katkar. ... Petitioner. V/s. Shobha Bapusaheb Patrawali and another. ... Respondents. Indrajeet Joshi for the petitioner. S.S.Patwardhan for respondent No.1. D.R.More, APP for the State. CORAM: B.R.GAVAI, J. DATED : 9th August 2011. P.C. : By way of these petitions, the petitioner challenges the order dated 24th June 2011 passed by the learned revisional Court thereby rejecting the revision filed against the order passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate dated 7th February 2011 thereby rejecting the application filed by the present petitioner seeking direction to send the cheques in question to the handwriting expert along with specimen handwriting of the complainant and one Rajendra Bapusaheb Patrawali. 2. The respondent- complainant has filed the proceedings under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act since, according to the 2 2004.11.wp-- complainant, the cheques issued by the petitioner to the complainant were dishonoured. It is the defence of the present petitioner that the cheques were not given towards any amount which was due to the complainant but only so as to show his standing and credit in the market. It is his case that blank cheques were given by him and they were filled in by one Rajendra Bapusaheb Patrawali, who is the son of respondent No.1-complainant in W.P.No.2004/2011 and brother of the respondent No.1- complainant in W.P.No.2005/2011. 3. The application is vehemently opposed by Shri Patwardhan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents- complainants. He submits that the present application is nothing but an attempt to protract the proceeding pending before the learned Magistrate since 2003. He further submits that whether the cheques are written by the signatory thereof or by someone else cannot be a matter of defence in the trial. 4. The proceedings under section 138 are quasi criminal proceedings. As such the accused must have complete opportunity to defend his case. In any case, no prejudice would be caused to the complainants if the application is allowed. In that view of the matter, writ petitions are allowed in the following terms: The impugned orders passed by the learned Magistrate and learned revisional Court are quashed and set aside. The applications filed by the present petitioner for sending the cheques in question to the handwriting expert after obtaining specimen handwritings of the petitioner and Rajendra Bapusaheb Patrawali is allowed. However, in the facts of the case, learned Magistrate shall request the competent authority 3 2004.11.wp-- to give its opinion within a period of eight weeks from the date of sending it. Needless to state that the cost for obtaining the opinion of the handwriting expert would be borne by the petitioner. After the receipt of report of the handwriting expert, learned Magistrate shall conclude the proceedings within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the said report. The petitions are allowed subject to the costs quantified in the sum of Rs.7,000/- each to be deposited by the petitioner in the trial Court within a period of two weeks from today. The respondents- complainants would be at liberty to withdraw the same. The parties shall appear before the learned Magistrate on 16th August 2011 and make a request for taking the matter on board. All the concerned to act on an authenticated copy of this order. (B.R.GAVAI, J.)