IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 22ND FEBRUARY 2008 / 3RD PHALGUNA 1929 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 525 of 2008() ----------------------------- STC.36/2007 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, PAYYANNUR .................... REVN. PETITIONER/ACCUSED: --------------------------------- N. BALAN, S/O. RAMAN, NANIYIL HOUSE, NEAR GOVT. HOSPITAL, MOORIKKOVVAL, PAYYANNUR P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.A.SATHEESH SRI.V.T.MADHAVANUNNI RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT: ----------------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM. 2. T.V. LEELA, D/O. KARUNAKARAN, ITTAMMAL HOUSE, MOORIKKOVVAL, KOKKANISSERI, PAYYANNUR P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI. M.S. BREEZE, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.02.2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR , J. ========================== Crl.R.P. No. 525 of 2008 ========================== Dated this the 22nd day of February, 2008. ORDER The petitioner, who is the accused in S.T.C No. 36/2007 of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Payyannur which was a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, applied for sending the cheque in question to the handwriting expert for comparison. The said application was dismissed by the trial Magistrate as per the impugned order dated 05.02.2008. I do not find any good ground to interfere with the impugned order in proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The petitioner may, if so advised, challenge the said order in case the case ends in a conviction and he is forced to file an appeal under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. Reserving this right, if any, of the petitioner, this Crl. M.C is dismissed. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE. rv