Smt. V Jayamma vs M/S Rajesh Exports Ltd on 12 October, 2018

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Smt. V Jayamma vs M/S Rajesh Exports Ltd on 12 October, 2018

Bench: P.S. Dinesh Kumar

                            1
                                      CRL.P. NO.5679/2018
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

     DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2018

                        BEFORE

    THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR

         CRIMINAL PETITION No.5679 OF 2018

BETWEEN:

SMT.V.JAYAMMA
W/O LATE VINAYAK
AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS
RESIDING AT
NO.461, 11TH CROSS,
5TH MAIN, SADASHIVA NAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 080.                      ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI KEMPARAJU, ADVOCATE)

AND :

M/S RAJESH EXPORTS LTD.,
COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER COMPANY'S ACT
AND HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.4,
BATAVIA CHAMBERS
KUMARA KRUPA ROAD
KUMARA PARK EAST
BANGALORE - 560 037.               ...RESPONDENT

(BY SRI P.RAJU, ADVOCATE)

     THIS CRL.P. IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO
SET   ASIDE    THE     ORDER    DATED    07.07.2018   IN
C.C.NO.17016/2009, PASSED BY THE HON'BLE XXI A.C.M.M.,
AND XXIII ASCJ, BANGALORE.
                             2
                                      CRL.P. NO.5679/2018
     THIS CRL.P COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

                          ORDER

Heard Shri Kemparaju, learned advocate for the petitioner and Shri P.Raju, learned advocate for the respondent.

2. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that petitioner-accused filed an application under Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, seeking reference of a dishonoured cheque to an hand-writing expert. The said application has been rejected by the impugned order. He further submits that the cheque has been altered four times and finally, it was presented for Rs.93,50,000/-. Therefore, there is necessity for referring the cheque to an hand-writing expert.

3. Per contra, learned advocate for the respondent submits that it is a case of revalidation wherein, petitioner himself has signed the cheque and the same is recorded by the learned Magistrate in the impugned 3 CRL.P. NO.5679/2018 order. He further submits that trial is complete and the matter is now set down for the arguments on behalf of the accused.

4. The learned Magistrate has recorded in paragraph No.6 of the order as follows:

"6. It is the say of the accused that, she had issued signed blank cheque to the complainant at the time of availing loan. But the complainant has misused the said cheque and filed this complaint......."

(Emphasis supplied)

5. The above extracted portion of the impugned order clearly demonstrates that the stand of accused- petitioner before the learned Magistrate is that the cheque was signed in blank and handed over to the complainant and the same has been misused. Thus, the accused has admitted her signature on the cheque. Therefore, no exception can be taken to the impugned order rejecting petitioner's prayer to refer the matter to an hand-writing expert.

CRL.P. NO.5679/2018

6. Resultantly, this petition fails and it is accordingly dismissed.

7. In view of dismissal of the petition, I.A.No.1/2018 does not survive for consideration and it is also disposed of.

No costs.

Sd/-

JUDGE Yn.

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court