[-1-] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL W.P.NO.2057 OF 2008 Manjeet Kaur Jagjitsing Kalyan ..Petitioner Vs. Pratapsing Amarsing Barma and Anr. ..Respondents ... Mr.P.R.Arjunwadkar advocate for Petitioner Ms.A.A.Mane A.P.P. for the State Mr.A.K.Saxena Adv. for Respondent no.1-original complainant ... CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATE : DECEMBER 16, 2008 DATE : DECEMBER 16, 2008 DATE : DECEMBER 16, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned advocate for the petitioner-original accused, the learned advocate for the respondent no.1-original complainant and the learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The respondent no.1 lodged complaint bearing SCC No.502 of 2004 under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act before the learned Vth Jt.Judicial Magistrate, F.C. Kalyan against the petitioner. During the course of trial, the petitioner preferred application to send some documents to the [-2-] handwriting expert and to examine the handwriting expert. The said application came to be rejected by order dated 8.2.2007 by the trial Court on the ground that the said application was vague. Being aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred Revision No.30 of 2007 before the learned Ad-hoc Dist. Judge-1,Kalyan. The learned Ad-hoc Dist. Judge-1 Kalyan by order dated 22.4.2008 dismissed the said application on the ground that the application preferred by the petitioner was vague. It does appear that the application preferred by the petitioner was vague. However, it appears that the applicant was not properly advised and hence such application came to be preferred by him. In this view of the matter and in the interest of justice I am inclined to grant one opportunity to the petitioner to prefer proper application for sending the documents to handwriting expert and for examining the handwriting expert. Hence, the order dated 8.2.2007 passed by the learned Vth Jt.Judicial Magistrate F.C. Kalyan in SCC No.502 of 2004 is set aside. So also the order dated 22.4.2008 passed by the learned Ad-hoc Dist. Judge-1, Kalyan in Revision No.30 of 2007, is set aside. However, liberty is granted to the [-3-] petitioner to prefer a fresh application on or before 6.1.2009 for sending the documents to the handwriting expert and for examining the handwriting expert. On such application being preferred, the trial Court shall dispose of the same by 9.2.2009. 3. The trial Court shall not be influenced by any observations made in this order while deciding the said application. 4. Petition is disposed of. [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.]