Criminal Misc. No. M- 3598 of 2011 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M- 3598 of 2011 Date of decision:- 04.02.2011 Ramesh Singh Badwal and another ...Petitioners Versus M/s Showman Associates ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present:- Mr. Manish Soni, Advocate for the petitioners. RITU BAHRI J.(Oral) This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is for quashing of order dated 02.12.2010 (Annexure P-1) passed by Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Jalandhar and further allowing the petitioners to produce the report of hand writing expert in evidence to prove the factum of difference in ink used in body and signature of cheque in question and to examine the hand writing expert as DW1. Brief facts are that the petitioner runs his business in the name and style of M/s Badwal Enterprises and booked a site for exhibition of Wrought Iron Furniture for a total rent of Rs.95,000/-. Rs.10,000/- were paid as advance. Rs.85,000/- were to be paid on completion of exhibition. A criminal complaint No.163/2 of 20.7.2000 under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act was initiated by the complainant M/s Showman Associates through its proprietor Satish Sharma when the cheque of Rs.85,000/-, given by the petitioner was presented drawn on Bank of Punjab Limited, Nawanshahr, was dishonoured by the bank of the accused with the ramarks 'Funds Insufficient' vide memo dated 24.3.2001. Case of the petitioner is that a blank signed cheque was given as Criminal Misc. No. M- 3598 of 2011 -2- security towards some other transactions. The body of the cheque was filled by the complainant himself to prove that this cheque was dishonoured by the bank. Petitioner had sought permission vide application dated 18.11.2010 to engage a hand writing expert regarding the factum of difference of ink used in the signature and ink used in the body as well as date. This application has been dismissed on the ground that the petitioner while making the statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. has not denied his signatures on the blank cheque. Mr. Manish Soni, counsel for the petitioner has argued that there is no dispute that the blank cheque was signed by him. His assertion is that the body amount and date are differ in terms of ink used. This blank cheque signed by him had been given to the complainant by way of security. Reliance has been placed on the Supreme Court judgment in Kalyani Baskar versus M.S. Sampoornam 2007(1) RCR (Criminal) 311. In this case opinion of hand writing expert had been sought under Section 243 Cr.P.C. by sending disputed cheque. The Supreme Court has observed that the application cannot be rejected on the ground that accused had filed the application without naming any person as witness or anything to be summoned. By invoking the principal of fair trial, the order dated 02.12.2010 (Annexure P-1) is quashed and the direction is given to the Judicial Magistrate to give one opportunity to the petitioner to get the opinion of the expert on the hand writing regarding the disputed cheque. The petition is disposed of accordingly. February 04, 2011 ( RITU BAHRI ) Vijay Asija JUDGE