TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>High Court sets aside lower court orders in cheque bouncing case, directs submission of signature for ink analysis.</h1> <h3>A. Devaraj Versus Rajammal</h3> The High Court allowed the criminal original petition, setting aside the orders of the Additional District and Sessions Judge and the Judicial Magistrate ... - Issues involved: The petition seeks to set aside an order related to a cheque bouncing case under Section 138 r/w 142 of Negotiable Instruments Act. The main issue is the determination of the age of the ink on the cheque.Summary:Issue 1: Setting aside the order in the cheque bouncing case The petitioner, an accused in a cheque bouncing case, filed a petition to challenge the order made by the Additional District and Sessions Judge and confirmed by the Judicial Magistrate. The proceedings were initiated based on a private complaint for an offence under Section 138 r/w 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.Issue 2: Determination of the age of the ink on the cheque During the proceedings, the petitioner filed an application under Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act to send the cheque for expert examination to determine the age of the ink. The application was initially dismissed by the Judicial Magistrate based on the lack of scientific facility to determine the age of the ink. However, the petitioner produced evidence suggesting that the Central Forensic Science Laboratory in Hyderabad could ascertain the age of the ink by comparing it with an admitted signature from the same period.Judgment: The High Court allowed the criminal original petition, setting aside the orders of the Additional District and Sessions Judge and the Judicial Magistrate. The petitioner was directed to submit his admitted signature for comparison within two weeks. The lower court was instructed to send both documents to the Central Forensic Science Laboratory for examination. Failure to produce the admitted signature would result in the petitioner losing the opportunity for comparison.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
