Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, N. Muniswamy Reddy, is the accused in CC.No.73/2009 pending before the JMFC, Srinivaspura, arising out of a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, for dishonour of a cheque. The accused filed an application under Sections 45 and 73 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, seeking to refer the cheque dated 15.10.2008 (Ex.P1) to a forensic laboratory for expert opinion. The accused admitted his signature on the cheque but contended that the contents of the cheque were not written by him and were filled up by the complainant in a different handwriting. He also sought to verify the age of the signature and other contents. The trial court dismissed the application on 6.10.2012, holding that since the accused admitted his signature, there was no need for forensic examination. The revisional court, in Crl.R.P.No.82/2012, confirmed the order on 15.10.2013. Aggrieved, the accused filed this criminal petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The High Court observed that the admission of signature does not preclude the accused from seeking expert opinion on the handwriting and age of ink, as the dispute is not about the signature but about the contents. The court held that the accused is entitled to a fair opportunity to defend himself, and the application ought to have been allowed. Accordingly, the petition was allowed, the orders of the courts below were set aside, and the trial court was directed to allow the application and refer the cheque to the forensic laboratory for opinion.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Dishonour of Cheque - Sections 45 and 73 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Application for Forensic Examination - The accused admitted his signature on the cheque but disputed the handwriting of the contents and the age of the ink. The trial court and revisional court dismissed the application solely on the ground of admission of signature. The High Court held that admission of signature does not bar the accused from seeking expert opinion on the handwriting and age of ink, as the dispute pertains to the contents and not the signature. The matter was remitted to the trial court to allow the application and refer the cheque to the forensic laboratory for opinion. (Paras 1-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the courts below erred in dismissing the accused's application under Sections 45 and 73 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, seeking forensic examination of the cheque, on the ground that the accused admitted his signature on the cheque.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The orders dated 6.10.2012 in CC.No.73/2009 and dated 15.10.2013 in Crl.R.P.No.82/2012 are set aside. The trial court is directed to allow the application filed by the accused under Sections 45 and 73 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and refer the cheque dated 15.10.2008 (Ex.P1) to the forensic laboratory for opinion of the expert.
Law Points
- Section 45 of Indian Evidence Act
- 1872
- Section 73 of Indian Evidence Act
- Admission of signature does not preclude forensic examination of handwriting and ink age
- Accused entitled to fair opportunity to defend
