1 WP : 3576.3577/2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.3576 OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL REVISION NO. 444 OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL CASE NO.2118 OF 2003 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.3577 OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL REVISION NO. 443 OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL CASE NO.2117 OF 2003 Mr. Wasim Shaikh Rafique .... Petitioner Vs. Mr. Felix Anthony Francis .... Respondents Mr. Ashok Tajane, Advocate for petitioner. Mrs. Revati Mohite Dere for respondent. Mrs. P.H. Kantharia, APP for State. Coram : Smt. R.P. SondurBaldota, J. Date : 19th July, 2011 2 WP : 3576.3577/2010 P.C. 1. These two petitions arise out of dismissal of the application of the petitioners for referring the cheques in question for the opinion of the handwriting expert. Facts in both the cases are identical. The parties thereto are also the same. The application filed by the petitioner for referring the cheques in question for the opinion of the handwriting expert was made at the stage when the cases were posted for judgment after completion of the entire trial. The trial court rejected the application, which order is confirmed by the sessions court by dismissing the revision application arising therefrom. The session court at paragraph 8 of its order observed as follows: It reveals from the record that the opponent has filed “ three complaints against the applicant. In one of the matters the applicant is convicted and two complaints are pending before the same Court. Now the complaints are on the stage of pronouncement of the Judgments before the learned lower Court and at this stage the applicant has filed application to send the cheque to the handwriting expert for verifying the handwriting. The defence of the applicant is not disclosed from the evidence on record that he has denied the handwriting of the cheque. It is also not denied by him in his statement under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and now at this stage, after availing full opportunity to contest the matter, after examining the witnesses and even after recording of his statement under Section 313 Code of Criminal Procedure, the applicant is coming with a case that the handwriting 3 WP : 3576.3577/2010 on the cheque is not of the applicant and he wants to send the cheque to the handwriting expert for report.” The Sessions Judge has correctly appreciated the application and the question arising therein. There is no need to interfere with the impugned order. Hence, the petitions are dismissed. (Smt. R.P. SondurBaldota, J) 4 WP : 3576.3577/2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.424 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION NO. 165 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL CASE NO.2117 OF 2003 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.425 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION NO. 164 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL CASE NO.2118 OF 2003 Mr. Wasim Shaikh Rafique .... Petitioner Vs. Mr. Felix Anthony Francis .... Respondents Mr. Ashok Tajane, Advocate for petitioner. Mrs. Revati Mohite Dere for respondent. Mrs. P.H. Kantharia, APP for State. Coram : Smt. R.P. SondurBaldota, J. Date : 19th July, 2011 5 WP : 3576.3577/2010 P.C. Mr. Tajane states that he is not prepared today argue these petitions. Hence, at his request stand over to 26th July 2011. It is made clear that there is no stay of hearing of the proceedings by the trial Court. The trial Court is at liberty to proceed further with the matter. (Smt. R.P. SondurBaldota, J)