Karnataka High Court
Smt Janaki vs Keshavashetty on 13 February, 2019
Author: Aravind Kumar
Bench: Aravind Kumar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 13th DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8944/2017
BETWEEN:
SMT. JANAKI
W/O LATE H.L. BASAVARAJU
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
ASSISTANT POST MASTER
S.B. BRANCH (MIS)
GENERAL POST OFFICE GPO
RAJBHAVAN ROAD
BENGALURU - 560 001
PRESENTLY NOW AT:
LAXMI VENKATESH NILAYA
NO.1/C, RAILWAY MENS LAYOUT
THANISANDRA
BENGALURU - 560 077.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. KEMPARAJU., ADVOCATE)
AND:
KESHAVASHETTY
S/O C. HANUMANTHASHETTY
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
R/AT NO.50, 1ST CROSS
V.V. NAGAR, KALLAHALLI
MANDYA CITY - 577 301.
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. K.V. NARASIMHAN., ADVOCATE )
2
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER DATED:11.04.2017 IN
CRL.REV.PET.NO.132/2015 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE II
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE,
MANDYA AND UPHELD THE ORDER PASSED BY THE
HON'BLE JMFC, MANDYA IN C.C. NO.314/2013
DATED:03.08.2015.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR
ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Petitioner who is accused in C.C.No.314/2013, which proceedings have been initiated for the offences punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, by the respondent - complainant was at the stage of recording statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C and at that point of time accused filed an application under Section 293 Cr.P.C seeking for Ex.P.1, KVP Form and signature found on the charge report for being referred to expert's opinion i.e., Forensic Science Laboratory, Mysore.
2. Learned trial Judge after having heard the arguments, by order dated 03.08.2015 allowed the 3 application. Being aggrieved by the same, respondent-complainant filed Crl.R.P.No.132/2015 by invoking the Section 397 of Cr.P.C and challenging the order passed by trial Court. Though revision petition itself was not maintainable, for reasons best known Revisional Court not only entertained the revision petition but also allowed the petition. On this short ground itself, order passed by the revisional court requires to be set aside. However, taking into consideration that this Court in exercise of power vested under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and in order to do substantial justice between parties and to put a quietus this dispute, this Court has examined the correctness and legality of the order passed by the trial Court allowing the application filed under section 293 Cr.P.C by order dated 11.04.2017.
3. The bone of contention of parties relates to signature found on the disputed cheque-Ex.P.1. Said cheque is said to have been issued by the accused in the year 2009, whereas accused contends 4 that cheque was issued in the year 2001 for a different transaction and it was misused by the complainant and hence, to ascertain the age of the handwriting found on the disputed cheque, accused sought for referring said cheque to handwriting expert. It would have sufficed, if the trial Court had referred the cheque alone for FSL report. However, in addition to cheque-Ex.P.1 being sent for Finger Print Expert's opinion report by impugned order dated 11.04.2017, learned Magistrate has also forwarded the KVP Form and charge report, which would have no bearing to ascertain the age of signature found on Ex.P.1. To that extent alone, impugned order requires to be modified.
Hence, I proceed to pass the following;
ORDER (1) Criminal petition is allowed in part.
(2) Order dated 03.08.2015 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, 5 Mandya in C.C.No.314/2013 allowing the application filed by the accused under section 293 Cr.P.C is hereby modified and this application is allowed in part.
(3) Disputed cheque- Ex.P.1 is
ordered to be sent to Handwriting
Expert i.e., Forensic Science
Laboratory, Bangalore (not
Mysore) for ascertaining the age of the year of handwriting found on the disputed cheque.
In view of petition having been allowed in part, I.A.No.1/2018 for stay does not survive for consideration and same stands rejected.
SD/-
JUDGE RU