N THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPU or.M.P. No. 3&33 /2o11 ?ETETIONER ACCUSED Vijay Kumar Tiwari S/o Kashi Ram Tiwari, aged about 32 years, Occu.: Business, R/o Manipur, Ambikapur, Police Station 8a Tahsil Ambikapur, Distt Sarguja (C.G.) VERSUS : 1) State of Chhattisgarh Through : Station House Officer, P.S. Kotwali, Ambikapur, District Sarguja (C.G.) 2) State of Chhattisgarh Tl’irough: Inspector General of Police (CID) Police Headquarter, Raipur, District RaipurlC. G.) PETITION UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF. i CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ~ /V / I R . C'yvIOv amnglg // 1H oo MWW L: wmm mmm SB : Hon’ble Shri Manindra; Mohan Shrivastava, J. ’7. 12.20 1 1 Shri Shakti Raj Sinha, .Shri Rakesh Jha, Dy. copy. Heard on admission, WM fkéW %s§mm This petition under Se‘ the petitioner praying for sending the recorde of No.425/2005 for examinatio the petitioner submits that though an Learned counsel for re the concerned Family Court by the applicau'on was moved bef investigating agency for h nding it over the part of the Court’s records for being sent for xamination of Handwriting Expert, the same was rejected by th Family Court. He submits that the exam ination of the concern d document containing signatures of the petiu'oner in the Court recor s is necessary for effective defence. e petitioner submitted that after the investigation, charge sheet s aiready been filed. counsel for the petitioner. Govt. Advocate for the State on advance mm (We) ‘tion ‘r 482 of the Cr.P.C. has been filed by issuance of appropriate direction for Family Court in Miscellaneous Case n of Handwriting Expert. Learned counsel for WW .. mm 1:1 zoo mmm ‘_Z WW 1=séW amimm Pra’n_ ,, vee dy of’the petitioner lies elseWhere. If the 1 of anv document forming part of the _ "records of JudiciaL proceedings of another Court the petitioner may apphcatlc‘n before the concerned trlal Court for 1eva11t rec aring in the Court records] proceedings. .If thatvbe so, the reme - petitioner seeks egraminatio v t ’ Eipe‘iit of'the signatures app )rds and] or examination by Handwriting summoning ‘ The petitioner would be at liberty to move such application I before the concerned trial C urt which shall cons1der and deCide the same in accordance With 1a . However, no direction can be glven as prayed for by the petitioner ' With the aforesaid ob of. this petition. rvations, the petition is finally disposed Sd/— Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge m m (We?)