Handwriting comparison of cheque entries remains available when authorship is specifically alleged and directly affects execution credibility.

Where a complainant specifically asserts that the accused personally filled cheque entries in the complainant's presence, the authorship of those entries becomes relevant to the credibility of the asserted execution and issuance. Although the identity of the person filling cheque entries is ordinarily immaterial once execution is established and the statutory presumption applies, expert handwriting comparison must be available where it can directly test that specific factual assertion. The notes state that the accused may seek expert analysis of the cheque entries in such circumstances, despite the statutory presumption.

---

---

Issues: Whether accused persons in cheque-dishonour proceedings may obtain expert analysis of cheque entries where the complainant specifically asserts that those entries were written by the accused in the complainant's presence.

Analysis: Although the identity of the person who filled in cheque entries is ordinarily immaterial once execution is established and the statutory presumption operates, it becomes materially relevant where the complainant's case specifically rests on an assertion that the accused personally wrote the entries. Proof that the handwriting is not that of the accused would directly affect the credibility and acceptability of the complainant's evidence concerning execution and issuance of the cheques. The accused must therefore be afforded an opportunity to obtain expert evidence on that factual assertion.

Conclusion: The accused are entitled to have the impugned cheques sent for expert analysis of the entries, in their favour.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a complainant specifically attributes the writing of cheque entries to the accused, handwriting comparison is relevant to test the credibility of that assertion and cannot be denied merely because a statutory presumption arises upon execution of the cheque.

---