IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 13TH OCTOBER 2011 / 21ST ASWINA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 1252 of 2011() ------------------------- CC.606/2007 of JUDL. FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, ATTINGAL .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED ---------------------- SANTHOSH KUMAR, SANTHOSH BHAVAN, 28TH MILE, NEAR VETTIYARA SCHOOL, NAVAIKULAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.TRIPTEN RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE ---------------------------------- 1. OMANA, D/O.GOURI, NANDANAM, CHEMPOOR, MUDAKKAL VILLAGE, PIN 691001. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R1 BY ADV. SRI.J.JAYAKUMAR R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.R.REMA THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/10/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: JJJ Crl.MC.No. 1252 of 2011() APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES: A1: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT IN C.C.NO:606/2007 FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-1, ATTINGAL A2: COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER A3: COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER A4: COPY OF THE C.M.P. NO:7087/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE JUDICIAL 1ST CLASS MAGISTRATE-1, ATTINGAL A5: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 11.11.2010 IN C.M.P.NO:7087/2010 IN C.C.NO:606/07 OF THE JUDICIAL 1ST CLASS MAGISTRATE-1, ATTINGAL RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A.TO JUDGE JJJ N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, J. ---------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.1252 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of October, 2011 Order The accused in C.C.No.606/07 on the file of the JFCM Court- I Attingal is the petitioner herein. The complaint was filed alleging offence under Section 138 of the N.I.Act. The cheque in question is for Rs.3,50,000/-. The accused denied the execution of the cheque. The complainant has mounted the box and gave evidence and the relevant documents, Exts.P1 to P7 were stated to have been marked. The petitioner/accused thereafter filed a petition to send two letters for getting the opinion of an expert. But that petition was rejected by the learned Magistrate. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that reading of those two letters would make it clear that the complainant was having in her possession two blank cheques and one of those cheques was misused in this case. But this contention is resisted by the learned counsel for the first respondent stating that it is nowhere stated even in the letter that it was a blank cheque. The learned counsel submits that Crl.M.C.1252/11 2 these two letters were not written by the complainant. When those letters were confronted to the complainant, she denied the same. It is also argued that there is nothing on the postal cover produced as Annexure-A3 to show that it reached the addressee at Baharin. Whatever that be, the question is whether the complainant could prove the execution of the cheque in question. In this connection, the learned counsel would also point out that in the reply notice it was admitted by the accused that one cheque was issued but the amount due thereunder was only Rs.50,000/- and that amount was already discharged by the accused. The learned counsel further submits that since the accused has admitted that the cheque in question was signed by the accused, the complainant can very well prove her case in the light of the evidence already adduced. The contention raised by the accused that the handwritings contained in those two letters should be compared by an expert to show that the cheque in question was written by the complainant herself will not in any way improve the case of the accused, the learned counsel for the complainant submits. In the light of the evidence adduced and in the light of what is stated above, I find no reason to allow the Crl.M.C.1252/11 3 application to send the documents, the letters for expert opinion. But it is made clear that the accused can adduce whatever other evidence available to strengthen the contention advanced by him. The Crl.M.C. is disposed of as above. N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. srd Crl.M.C.1252/11 4