THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1780 of 2011 ORDER: Petitioner approaches this Court by way of invoking the provisions under Sections 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C. aggrieved by the orders passed in Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No.4185 of 2010 in C.C.No.319 of 2008 dated 02.08.2011 by the learned II Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam, whereby the learned Magistrate dismissed the application filed by the petitioner invoking the provisions under Section 45 of the Evidence Act. Heard both sides. Petitioner preferred a petition to send for the documents Exs.P1 and P2 promissory note and the negotiable instrument, the cheque, which is the subject matter before the trial Court. The learned Magistrate dismissed the petition on the ground that the impugned petition filed in the year 2011 even though the case filed in the year 2010 and also the learned trial Judge held that this petition is only to drag the proceedings. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted before this Court that in the interest of justice, the said documents can be compared by a handwriting expert. This Court is of the view that the handwriting expert’s opinion is not a conclusive proof and further it is the case of the petitioner if the signature on the instrument is not of his signature, he can very well file a petition before the trial Court to verify the signature on the instrument along with his admitted signatures available in the court records and to decide the issue by invoking the provisions under Section 73 of the Evidence Act. Hence, this Criminal Petition is dismissed. The petitioner is at liberty to file an application seeking the Magistrate to verify his signature by invoking the provisions under Section 73 of the Evidence Act. The miscellaneous petitions, if any, filed along with the revision petition shall stand closed. ______________________ JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO 5th September 2011, Rns.