Court affirms denial of handwriting analysis in Section 138 case; emphasizes accused's admission.

The court upheld the Magistrate's decision to dismiss the accused's application for handwriting analysis of a cheque in a Section 138 case. Emphasizing the accused's admission of the signature's authenticity and citing legal principles from Bir Singh v. Mukesh Kumar, the court found no necessity for expert opinion on the entries. The accused's alleged intention to delay proceedings was noted, leading to the petition's dismissal. The accused was granted the opportunity to present arguments in the trial court.

---

---

Issues:
1. Application for sending the cheque to Forensic Science Laboratory for handwriting analysis.
2. Legality and propriety of the order dismissing the application.
3. Dispute regarding entries in the cheque.
4. Interpretation of the complainant's statement in the trial court.
5. Applicability of legal principles from Bir Singh v. Mukesh Kumar case.
6. Validity of the cheque despite entries made by another person.
7. Intention of the accused to protract the proceedings.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner, the accused in a case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, filed an application to send the cheque for handwriting analysis. The second respondent objected, alleging the intention to delay the case.
2. The learned Magistrate dismissed the application, leading to a challenge under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The court analyzed the necessity of sending the cheque for expert opinion.
3. The dispute centered on entries in the cheque, not the signature. The complainant's statement indicated that neither the accused nor her husband wrote the entries.
4. The court interpreted the complainant's statement, emphasizing the absence of a claim that the accused wrote the entries herself.
5. Referring to Bir Singh v. Mukesh Kumar case, the court highlighted the legal principles regarding signed cheques and the presumption of liability unless evidence rebuts it.
6. The court emphasized that the validity of the cheque is not affected even if someone else filled it up, as long as the accused admits the signature.
7. Ultimately, the court found no illegality in the Magistrate's order, noting the accused's intention to prolong the case. The petition was dismissed, allowing the accused to present contentions in the trial court.

Conclusion:
The judgment upheld the Magistrate's decision, emphasizing the accused's admission of the signature's authenticity and the lack of necessity for handwriting analysis. The legal principles from the Bir Singh case were applied to establish liability and validity of the cheque. The accused's attempt to delay proceedings was noted, leading to the dismissal of the petition while granting the accused the opportunity to present arguments in the trial court.

---