IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.P.RAY FRIDAY, THE 5TH AUGUST 2011 / 14TH SRAVANA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 1600 of 2011() ----------------------- ST.87/2010 OF JUDICIAL FIRAST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT - II, PARUR ............ PETITIONER / ACCUSED : -------------------------------------- SHINY SOLAMAN, W/O.P.S.SOLAMAN, RESIDING AT 1/345, PAREPARAMBIL HOUSE, SANTHI NAGAR, MAROTTICHUVADU, EDAPPALLY P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. ADDRESS OF THE PETITIONER SHOWN IN THE LEGAL NOTICE EMPLOYMENT DATA BANK (TRAINING & PLACEMENT CONSULTANT) PO BOX NO.3086, H.O.FORTH FLOOR, BABU'S ESTATE, SEEMATTY - OPP. NORTH GATE, KACHERIPADY, ERNAKULAM. BY ADVS. SRI. M. SASINDRAN SRI.JOHNY THOMAS RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT : ------------------------------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA- REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. K.J.JOSEPH, S/O.JOSEPH, J.J.NIVAS, KALATHIL HOUSE, GOTHURUTH KARA, CHENDAMANGALAM VILLAGE, PARAVUR TALUK. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. B. JAYASURYA THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...2/- Crl.MC.No. 1600 of 2011() APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURE'S ANNEXURE AI : COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE DATED 29-8-2008 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE AII : COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 25-9-2008 TO THE LAWYER NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE AIII : COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE AIV : COPY OF THE STATEMENT FILED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER 313 CR.P.C. ANNEXURE AV : COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 18-12-2010 REQUESTING TO SEND EXT.P1 CHEQUE BEFORE A HANDWRITING EXPERT. ANNEXURE AV(a) : COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE AVI : COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL.M.P. NO. 676 OF 2010 IN S.T. NO. 87 OF 2010 DATED 25-4-2011. RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURE'S - NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Mn B.P. RAY, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C. No. 1600 of 2011 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 5th day of August, 2011. O R D E R Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. 2. The petitioner is the accused in S.T. No. 87 of 2010 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Paravur for an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Even though I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned order, it is open to the petitioner to lead defence evidence that the signature in the disputed cheque is not of him. If the petitioner files an application to examine any officer of the bank to show that the petitioner has not signed the disputed cheque, the learned court below shall allow the same at the cost of the petitioner. The entire proceedings in the trial court shall be concluded within two months from today. This Crl.M.C. is disposed of as above. sd/- B.P. RAY, JUDGE. rv