CR.RA/1030/2005 1/4 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION No. 1030 of 2005 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE H.B.ANTANI ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not? 3 Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? ========================================================= VISHAL MULCHAND GALA- PROPRIETOR OF GALA PAPERS & GALA ESTATE - Applicant Versus THE STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANOTHER - Respondents ========================================================= Appearance : MR RJ GOSWAMI for Applicant. MS NANDINI JOSHI, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Respondent No. 1. MR ASHISH M DAGLI for Respondent No. 2. ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE H.B.ANTANI Date : 04/05/2006 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. Heard Mr. R. J. Goswami, learned Advocate for CR.RA/1030/2005 2/4 JUDGMENT the applicant, Ms. Nandini Joshi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No. 1 and Mr. Ashish M. Dagli, learned Advocate for respondent No. 2. 2. The present application is preferred under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, praying to quash and set aside the order dated 16-12-2005 passed by the learned Additional City Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad in Criminal Revision Application No. 257 of 2005, by which the learned Judge set aside the order passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No. 15, Ahmedabad in Criminal Case No. 7446 of 2004. While quashing and setting aside the aforesaid order, the learned Judge held that the reasons assigned by the learned Magistrate, while rejecting the application below Exh. 26, are not consistent with the ratio laid down by this Court in Madhubhai Gandabhai Patel Vs. Joitaram Jividas Patel and Another, 2005 (3) GLH 535, and, therefore, hand-writing of the disputed cheques were required to be decided by the Handwriting Expert in addition to the Examination Report of the Forensic Science Laboratory relating to the chemical examination of the ink used in handwritings. 3. Taking into consideration the submissions CR.RA/1030/2005 3/4 JUDGMENT canvassed by the learned Advocates and on perusal of the discussion in para 8 of the judgment rendered by the Revisional Court, the right of respondent No. 2 cannot be taken away. 4. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Revision Application is required to be allowed on the short point that the right of the applicant, to have the examination of the writing in the disputed cheques by referring the same to the Handwriting Expert as well as to the Forensic Science Laboratory, cannot be taken away or foreclosed. Respondent No. 2 is, therefore, given liberty to move an appropriate application before the learned Magistrate after recording of the evidence on behalf of the prosecution is over and the same be decided by the learned Magistrate in accordance with the law. The findings given by the learned Magistrate in the order dated 10-11-2005 would in no way come in the way of respondent No. 2 when the appropriate application is preferred. The matter, which is pending in the Court of learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No. 15, Ahmedabad, be decided as expeditiously as possible and preferably within 6 months from the date of the receipt of the writ of the Court. CR.RA/1030/2005 4/4 JUDGMENT 5. With the aforesaid observations, the order passed by learned Additional City Session Judge, Court No. 16, Ahmedabad, is quashed and set aside. Rule is made absolute. Direct Service is permitted. [H. B. ANTANI, J.] /shamnath