IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 10TH OCTOBER 2011 / 18TH ASWINA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 2948 of 2011() ------------------------------------- C.M.P.NO.2581/2011 IN CC NO.220/98 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, NEYYATTINKARA, TRIVANDRUM ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S)/ ACCUSED --------------------------------------- SHAJU KUMAR, S/O. SADANANDAN NADAR, SHAJU BHAVAN, VENPAKAL DESOM, ATHIYANOOR VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV SRI.K.K.DHEERENDRA KRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S)/ COMPLAINANT & STATE --------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. PUSHPAKUMAR, S/O.SREEDHARAN NADAR, PADIPURAVILAKAM MELEPUTHENVEEDU, NEDUMKADU WARD, KARAMANA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.PIN-695 001. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.B.JAYASURYA R2 BY ADV. SRI.G.SUDHEER THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: sts CRMC.NO.2948/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES: ANNEX 1 COPY OF THE CHEQUE DATED 31/12/1997 ANNEX 1(A) COPY OF THE CHEQUE DATED 31/12/1997 ANNEX II COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE ACCUSED ALONG WITH AFFIDAVIT DATED 03/11/2007 IN CC NO.220/98. ANNEX II(A) COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE ACCUSED ALONG WITH AFFIDAVIT DATED 03/11/2007 IN CC NO.221/98. ANNEX III COPY OF THE REPORT SENT BY THE FORENSIC SCIENCE LAB DATED 05/02/2010. ANNEX IV COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER (MP NO.2581/11 IN CC NO.220/98. ANNEX V COPY OF THE ORDER IN CMP NO.2581/11 IN CC NO.220/98. RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, J. -------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.2948 of 2011 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of October 2011 O R D E R This petition is filed by the accused in C.C.Nos. 220/1998 and 221/1998 of J.F.C.M.-I, Neyyatinkara. The complaints were originally filed under Sec.138 of N.I.Act. Subsequently it was altered to Sec.420 IPC. After trial the accused was convicted in both cases. The accused took up the matter in appeal. The appellate court remanded the case to the trial court to afford an opportunity to the accused to send the two cheques and also the admitted handwritings for comparison. Thereafter the two cheques and the admitted handwritings taken in open court were sent for comparison. The expert could not give any final opinion since the admitted handwritings and the disputed document had a time gap of 10 years. Thereafter, the accused made a request to forward the acknowledgment Crl.M.C. No.2948 of 2011 -: 2 :- card which was of the year 2001 for comparison. The handwritings contained in the two cheques were of the year 1998. The learned counsel for the complainant has rightly pointed out that there is no guarantee that the acknowledgment cards were filled up by the accused since it could have as well been filled up by the accountant or somebody else. 2. Now the learned counsel for the accused submits that there would be records with the bank prepared at the time when the accounts were opened. Here also, the learned counsel for the complainant would submit that the account opening forms will contain only the signature of the person who intends to open the account but the handwritings therein would be usually of the bank officials. Therefore, that also may not be a safe method for getting the handwritings compared. 3. However, if there is any other document containing the admitted handwriting of the accused which Crl.M.C. No.2948 of 2011 -: 3 :- is proximate in time, namely; 1998, 1999 or 2000 and if the learned Magistrate finds that those handwritings were of the accused and then only the cheques and those handwritings need be forwarded for getting expert opinion. If such documents are available to be sent for expert opinion, the expert will see that the opinion is furnished within two months from the date of receipt of the letter and the documents sent from the court of the learned Magistrate. This Crl.M.C. is disposed of accordingly. N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Jvt