FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4329 OF 2009 Jingonda Bhau Patil Versus State of Maharashtra _____________________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of : Coram, appearances, Court s orders : ’ or directions and Registrar s’ : Court s or Judge s orders ’ ’ orders : _____________________________________________________________________________________ Mr.Amit Borker for applicant Mrs.P.P.Bhosale, APP CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : 27th JANUARY, 2010. PC :- 1. Heard Mr.Borker at some length. The Courts below have observed that the petitioner has not given a suggestion to the witness of the nature referred to in the impugned orders and particularly that there is alterations in the date of the cheque. The complaint is of the year 2007. To my mind, the Courts below were in no error when they refused to assist the petitioner accused in this case. All that the Courts were insisting upon was that he should proceed with the cross examination of witness. 2. Mr.Borker states that the petitioner is willing to proceed with the cross examination and put all suggestions as are necessary so also seek such clarifications with regard to the alleged alterations. 3. It would be open for the petitioner to reiterate the request for sending the cheques for examination of hand writing expert after he cross examine the witness, who is presently in the box. Granting such liberty and keeping open all pleas of both sides, this application is disposed of. (S.C.Dharmadhikari, J.)