Dismissal of Criminal Revision Petition Due to Inaccurate Age Determination of Ink

The court upheld the dismissal of the petition, emphasizing the lack of scientific methods to determine the age of ink accurately. The Criminal Revision Petition was found to be without merit and was dismissed. The Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tiruchirappalli, was directed to dispose of the pending Criminal Appeal within two months. The court concluded that granting the petition would only cause unnecessary delays without serving any significant purpose.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Legitimacy of the dismissal of the petition filed under Section 293 of Cr.P.C.
2. Determination of the age of ink on promissory notes and cheques.
3. Allegations of misuse of blank cheques and promissory notes.
4. Examination of precedents regarding the scientific determination of ink age.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Legitimacy of the Dismissal of the Petition Filed Under Section 293 of Cr.P.C.:

The petitioners filed a Criminal Revision Petition against the order passed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tiruchirappalli, which dismissed their petition under Section 293 of Cr.P.C. The petitioners sought to forward documents (Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.8) to the Nutron Activation Analysis Chemistry Division, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai, for examining the age of the ink used in the signatures. The petitioners were convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (N.I. Act) and were appealing the conviction. The Principal District and Sessions Judge had dismissed the petition, leading to the current revision petition.

2. Determination of the Age of Ink on Promissory Notes and Cheques:

The petitioners contended that the promissory notes and cheques were not signed or issued during the alleged period of 2005 and 2007. They argued that the ink's age would prove that the documents were filled long after the signing. They cited precedents from the Telangana High Court and the Bombay High Court, which had directed the sending of documents to the Nutron Activation Analysis for similar examinations.

3. Allegations of Misuse of Blank Cheques and Promissory Notes:

The complainant alleged that the accused had borrowed Rs.30,00,000 and issued cheques that were dishonored due to insufficient funds. The petitioners argued that the blank cheques and promissory notes issued long ago (1996 and 1997) had been misused by the complainant. They claimed that the fading ink on the signatures indicated that the documents were not contemporaneously filled.

4. Examination of Precedents Regarding the Scientific Determination of Ink Age:

The court examined various precedents regarding the scientific determination of ink age. It referenced decisions such as:

- M/s. Dhana Lakshmi Mills Limited Vs. R. Krishnamurthy and Others: The court held that the age of ink cannot be determined with scientific accuracy and that such petitions would create confusion.
- Yash Pal V. Kartar Singh: The Punjab and Haryana High Court held that determining the age of ink based on writing is not feasible and would only create confusion.
- A. Inayathullah Vs. A. Ramesh: The court reiterated that there is no facility available in India to ascertain the age of ink accurately and that sending documents for such analysis is futile.

The court noted that the Assistant Director of the Forensic Science Department had confirmed the lack of scientific methods to determine the age of ink accurately. The Nutron Activation Analysis, BABC, Mumbai, could only provide an approximate range, which is not exact and is confined to atomic research, making it unsuitable for litigation purposes.

Conclusion:

The court upheld the dismissal of the petition, emphasizing the non-availability of scientific methods to determine the age of ink. The Criminal Revision Petition was found to be devoid of merits and was dismissed. The Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tiruchirappalli, was directed to dispose of the pending Criminal Appeal within two months. The court concluded that allowing the petition would only delay the proceedings without serving any substantial purpose.

---