Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Ashok Kumar Garg vs Bansal Poultries on 1 August, 2013

Author: Amol Rattan Singh

Bench: Amol Rattan Singh

           CRR No.1038 of 2013                                -:1:-

                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                                     AT CHANDIGARH

                                                       CRR No.1038 of 2013.
                                                       Date of decision : August 1, 2013.

           Ashok Kumar Garg
                                                                                 ...... Petitioner
                                                Versus

           Bansal Poultries, Golpura (Barwala)
                                                                               ...... Respondent

           CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AMOL RATTAN SINGH

                                                ***
           1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
           2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
           3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
                                                 ***

           Present :           Mr. Vineet Sehgal, Advocate,
                               for the petitioner.

                               Ms. Kamalpreet, Advocate,
                               for the respondent.

           AMOL RATTAN SINGH, J. (Oral)

This petition has been filed for setting aside the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Panchkula, dated 05.03.2013 dismissing an application moved by the present petitioner for sending the cheque in question to Central Forensic Science Laboratory (C.F.S.L.), Chandigarh, for examination to ascertain the difference of age of the ink of the signatures and writing in the body of the cheque.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of T.Nagappa vs. Y.R. Muralidhar reported as 2008(2) Civil Court Cases 569 (S.C.), to submit that a fair trial demands that no lacuna should be left in the defence of the accused and, as such no prejudice would be caused if the cheque in question is sent for the examination that he seeks it to be sent for. Sorot Gaurav 2013.08.08 10:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRR No.1038 of 2013 -:2:-

Learned counsel for the respondent on the other hand, has submitted that the application itself, moved before the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, was simply a delaying tactic and, as a matter of fact, it would have no bearing, on the eventual outcome of the case, because the ink which may have been used, could have been manufactured at an earlier point of time than that when it was actually used.

Whereas there may be some force in that contention, another aspect also is that nothing may devolve upon the age of the ink for other reasons also. However, since it may be one test which could go towards just adjudication, either by affirmation or elimination, in more ways than one, I see no reason why the prayer of the petitioner should not be allowed and the cheque be not sent to the C.F.S.L. Chandigarh, for such determination.

Consequently, the impugned order is set aside and the cheque in question is ordered to be sent to the C.F.S.L. Chandigarh, for determination of the age of the ink on it. However, to ensure that the trial Courts' proceedings are not unnecessarily delayed, the C.F.S.L. Chandigarh, is directed to send its report within 2 weeks, after receipt of the cheque in question from the trial Court.

Nothing said hereinabove would affect the merits of the case, inasmuch as, the validity of the instrument and the purpose for which it was used or not used, or as to how the complainant came into possession thereof etc.,would be determined entirely as per the wisdom of the trial Court on the basis of evidence led before it.




                                                           ( AMOL RATTAN SINGH )
           August 1, 2013                                           JUDGE
           Gaurav Sorot



Sorot Gaurav
2013.08.08 10:31
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document