IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 1ST JULY 2008 / 10TH ASHADHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 1357 of 2008() ------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 25/02/2008 IN CMP.7818/07 IN CC..344/2000 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-I, TRIVANDRUM .................... PETITIONER: ACCUSED: -------------------- M. NAGAMMA, SEA FACE, THOTTATHUVILAKOM, AVADUTHURA, KOVALAM P.O. BY ADV. SRI.VADAKARA V.V.N.MENON SRI.T.N.SUKUMARAN RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT & STATE: --------------------------------- 1. K. JAYAKUMAR, KRISHNA SADANAM, ARUMANNOOR, POOVAR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.RAMESH CHANDER FOR R1 R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. JAI GEORGE THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C.No. 1357 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 1st day of July, 2008 O R D E R The petitioner is the accused in a prosecution under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. According to her the signature appearing in the cheque in question is not affixed by her. She filed an application and by Annex.A5 order the learned Magistrate had allowed the application to send the cheque to the expert for comparison. It was directed in the order dt. 27.12.2005 in CMP 5406 of 2005 that the cheque be sent for comparison along with the admitted signatures which were specified by the petitioner. The cheque has not been sent to the expert so far. 2. While so, the complainant wanted certain other cheques allegedly signed by the petitioner/accused also to be forwarded to the expert for comparison. The petitioner raised objections against that application. She contended that those are not admitted signatures and therefore no purpose will be served by sending those signatures to the expert. Crl.M.C.No. 1357 of 2008 2 3. The learned Magistrate, by the impugned order, directed that notwithstanding the dispute about the genuineness of the signatures in the said 15 cheques, which were also directed to be sent (which were produced in another case) those can also be sent as standard signatures. The petitioner has come to this Court aggrieved by the said direction. 4. I find merit in the objections raised by the petitioner against the impugned order. The signature in the cheque involved in this case is disputed. That signature has got to be compared with other signatures which are not disputed. No purpose will be served by sending the other disputed signatures also along with the cheque in the questioned document for comparison. The undisputed signatures have got to be ascertained and sent to the expert. 5. The counsel were asked to respond whether the standard specimen signatures, which are available in the bank, have been sent to the expert for the purpose of comparison. Both sides submit that neither had made a request to send the standard specimen signatures to the expert for comparison. I am satisfied in these circumstances that the impugned order can be set aside giving option to the Crl.M.C.No. 1357 of 2008 3 respondent/complainant to specify other admitted signatures, if any, for the purpose of forwarding to the expert along with the disputed signature. If specimen standard signatures are available in the bank, that should be the best signatures to be used for comparison with the disputed signature in question. The respondent/complainant can specify the further admitted signatures which also must be sent to the expert along with the cheque in dispute to the expert. Such specification must be made before the learned Magistrate within a period of 30 days from this date. The learned Magistrate must consider such request and pass appropriate orders. 6. In the result: a) This Crl.M.C. is allowed in part. b) The impugned order is set aside. c) It is held that the said 15 cheques referred to in the order, which are not admitted by the complainant, need not be sent to the expert. d) The complainant is given option to specify the admitted standard signatures which must be sent to the expert for comparison Crl.M.C.No. 1357 of 2008 4 along with the disputed cheque within a period of 30 days. Appropriate further orders must be passed by the learned Magistrate on such request. (R. BASANT) Judge tm