IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 2ND MARCH 2009 / 11TH PHALGUNA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 837 of 2009() ------------------------ AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 08/01/2009 IN CMP. 8569 /2008 IN CC.53/2001 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, CHENGANNUR .................... PETITIONER(S)/ ACCUSED ---------------------- CHANDRAKUMAR, KURAKKAMVILAKAM HOUSE, VELLANAD VILLAGE,VALIYARA MURI, NEDUMANGAD TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.R.GIREESH VARMA RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT/STATE -------------------------------- 1. GEORGE VARGHESE,MANNIL PUTHENVEEDU, ANGADICKAL SOUTH.PO,CHENGANNUR TALUK. 2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. P.A. SALIM THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J ----------------------- CRL.M.C.No. 837 OF 2009 --------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of March, 2009 O R D E R This petition is filed with a prayer to set aside the order passed by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Chengannur in C.M.P. 8569/08 in C.C.No. 53/2001. The learned counsel for the petitioner had made available before me for perusal a copy of the petition filed by him. It contains two prayers. The first prayer is to compare the handwriting in the cheque with that of the accused and to obtain a report. The second prayer is to find out the age of the signature found in Ext. P1. 2. As far as first prayer is concerned, it has to be stated that there is no case that the cheque had been written in the handwriting of the accused. When it is so, there is no point in comparing that handwriting with the handwriting of the accused. So it does not deserve consideration. 2. The second prayer is regarding the age of the signature. It is case of the petitioner namely the accused herein that a blank cheque was given to his brother-in-law Rajendran Nair, way back in 1995 and it has been used to file this case. The signature in Crl.M.C.No. 837/2009 -2- the cheque is admitted. In order to appreciate the contention of the accused that the cheque had been handed over to Rajendran Nair way back in 1995 and it has been used by the complainant now to file the case, the age of the signature assumes significant importance. It may be necessary to find out the truth in the case. But the trial court understood as if there is a dispute regarding the signature. Even the accused has no case that he has not signed in Ext. P1 cheque but such a signature in a blank cheque was put by him way back in 1995 and it was that cheque that has been utilised. But unfortunately the matter has not been considered before the court below in that perspective. Therefore it requires reconsideration. Therefore I set aside the order passed by the court below and direct the court below to consider the question which has been discussed by me above after hearing the other side as well and then pass appropriate orders. If the court ultimately decides to allow the prayer, the court may consider a laboratory where that facility is available for fixing the age of the signature. The Crl.M.C is disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN,JUDGE vkm