IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.Misc.No.M-22005 of 2009 Date of Decision:- 12.08.2009 Varun Roadlines and another ....Petitioner(s) vs. M/s Vikas Service Station ....Respondent(s) *** CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH *** Present:- Ms.Monisha Lamba, Advocate, for the petitioners. *** AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (Oral) The present petition has been preferred by the petitioner challenging the orders of the Courts below whereby his application for a direction to Rajesh Yadav, brother of the complainant, and Smt.Geetanjli wife of the complainant, to appear before the Court to give specimen signatures and handwriting and also for grant of permission to get the signatures and handwriting compared by the Fingerprints and Handwriting Expert has been declined. It is the contention of the counsel for the petitioner that the specific stand of the petitioner before the trial Court was that the cheque in question, which is the subject matter of the complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, was given to the complainant by way of security. It is further contention of the petitioner that the said cheque was not filled in his hand and although it bears his signatures and was given to the complainant by him, however, the amount has been filled in by Rajesh Yadav. It is further her contention that the petitioner had taken a stand that certain receipts marked DA to DD bear the signatures of the brother Crl.Misc.No.M-22005 of 2009 -2- and wife of the complainant and therefore, their specimen handwriting would be required to compare them with the receipts so that it could be proved that the alleged amount had already been paid for which the cheque was issued in discharge of the liability. A perusal of the orders passed by the Courts below would show that it is an admitted position that the cheques do bear the signatures of the complainant. Further, it has come on record that there is no pleadings to the effect that the receipts which are said to have been issued by the complainant if given by Rajesh Yadav brother of the complainant and Smt.Geetanjli wife of the complainant, were in the capacity of a person who was duly authorized or had the Authority to give such receipts. There is no pleading that there was any involvement of these two persons with the working of the company or these two were co-sharers or joint proprietors of Vikas Service Station. In the absence of such pleadings, even if the receipts are taken to be genuine and issued by Rajesh Yadav and Smt.Geetanjli, then also the same would have no legal force. Further, the requirement of law as per the provisions is that the cheque should have been issued by the person concerned and the onus upon the person who issued the cheque is that he has to rebut the presumption as drawn under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. In discharging the said onus, the petitioner was required to show that it has been given as a security. The signatures on the cheque having not been disputed and further receipts being not admissible in evidence in the light of their not being proved, the contention as raised by the counsel for the petitioner cannot be accepted. The orders passed by the Courts below are fully justified and in Crl.Misc.No.M-22005 of 2009 -3- accordance with law and, thus, call for no interference by this Court while exercising revisional jurisdiction. Dismissed. August 12, 2009 ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) poonam JUDGE