1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR. Criminal Application No. 818/2009 (Khushal Nagorao Keche .vs. Gopal S. Padole ) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's orders Mr. R.V. Lekurwale, Advocate for Applicant. Mr. Narendra Dafrey, Advocate for Non-applicant. .......... CORAM : P.D. KODE, J. DATED : JULY 17, 2009 Heard. By the present application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, sole accused facing prosecution for commission of offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in Criminal Complaint No.7004/2007 pending before Judicial Magistrate First Class (Special Court under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act), Nagpur instituted upon private complaint lodged by the non-applicant has prayed for quashing and setting aside order dated 15.7.2008 passed by said Court rejecting application preferred by him at Exh.17 for sending the documents mentioned therein for examination by Handwriting Expert. The applicant has also prayed for quashing and setting aside the order dated 20.1.2009 passed by the Additional 2 Sessions Judge-8, Nagpur rejecting application in revision No. 520/2008 preferred by him against said order dated 15.7.2008 passed by trial Court. After giving thoughtful consideration to the submissions advanced by both the sides and examining the order impugned in present petition and particularly order dated 15.7.2008 and taking into account the stage at which the application was made by the applicant, it is difficult to find any fault with the order passed by the trial Court. Same is the case with the order passed by Court of Session not entertaining application in revision preferred against said order passed by trial Court. In the premises aforesaid it is difficult to perceive of any of said orders being liable to be quashed and set aside much a less by exercising powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Hence present application sans merits deserves to be dismissed. However, at the hearing learned counsel for the applicant having also requested for clarifying that considering the count on which the application was rejected, applicant being not precluded for renewing his same prayer by making an application at appropriate stage and granting him liberty for such a purpose and there being substance in the said submission in view of application preferred being rejected on the count of same being premature and not considering the prayer on the merits his said request deserves to be accepted with favour. Hence application is dismissed in limine with 3 clarification of applicant being not precluded to renew his prayer for sending the documents to Handwriting Expert by making an application at appropriate stage. Needless to add that in event of such an application being preferred , the trial Court shall decide the same after hearing both the parties and in accordance with the law and uninfluenced by such a prayer being rejected at earlier stage of trial. JUDGE halwai