Court dismisses expert opinion request on cheque entries due to lack of dispute on signature or amount entered.

The High Court upheld the lower court's decision, dismissing the petitioner's application for expert opinion on cheques entries. The court found sending the cheques for expert opinion unnecessary as the petitioner did not dispute his signature or the amount entered. The petitioner's acknowledgment of liability in an agreement further supported this decision, leading to the dismissal of the Criminal Miscellaneous Case.

---

---

Issues:
1. Application for expert opinion on cheques entries rejected by lower court.

Analysis:
The petitioner, the 2nd accused in a case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, sought expert opinion on cheques entries to disprove the complainant's claims. The complainant alleged the petitioner, as a Director, failed to pay for cement supplied. The lower court rejected the application, stating it would not aid in arriving at a just decision. The petitioner argued that obtaining expert opinion was crucial for presenting rebuttal evidence. However, the court found no purpose in sending the cheques for expert opinion as the petitioner did not dispute his signature on the cheques or the amount entered in words.

Conclusion:
The High Court upheld the lower court's decision, dismissing the petitioner's application for expert opinion on cheques entries. The court noted that the petitioner had acknowledged the liability in an agreement and did not dispute his signature on the cheques or the amount entered in words. Therefore, sending the cheques for expert opinion would only delay the trial unnecessarily. As a result, the Criminal Miscellaneous Case was dismissed.

---