Cheque signature presumption defeats request for handwriting expert examination of name and date entries.

Admitted signature on a cheque attracts the statutory presumption that the instrument was issued by the signatory and duly filled; on that basis, handwriting expert examination limited to the name and date portions was not warranted. The cited authorities were found inapplicable because they involved disputed signatures. No perversity was found in the Trial Court and Revisional Court orders, and the challenge to refusal of expert examination failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether a cheque should be sent for handwriting expert examination of the name and date portions when the accused has admitted his signature on the cheque.

Analysis: The admitted signature on the cheque attracted the statutory presumption that the instrument had been issued by the signatory and properly filled. In those circumstances, the request to send only the name and date portions for expert examination did not warrant interference, especially when the accused's reliance on other decisions was found inapplicable because the signatures themselves were disputed there. No perversity was found in the orders of the Trial Court and the Revisional Court.

Conclusion: The request for handwriting expert examination was not accepted, and the challenge to the concurrent orders failed.

---