https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=404487 Where the accused had admitted the cheque signature and had already been given an effective opportunity to lead defence evidence, the Punjab and Haryana HC upheld refusal to permit handwriting expert/FSL examination on the cheque, treating the belated request as unnecessary for a just decision. The Court also upheld refusal to summon additional witnesses under Section 311 CrPC because the witnesses were already known from the beginning, the request was made at the stage of final arguments, and no material showed the evidence was essential rather than dilatory. The supervisory challenge therefore failed. en-us Tue, 16 Feb 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 24 Feb 2021 09:43:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=404487 Where the accused had admitted the cheque signature and had already been given an effective opportunity to lead defence evidence, the Punjab and Haryana HC upheld refusal to permit handwriting expert/FSL examination on the cheque, treating the belated request as unnecessary for a just decision. The Court also upheld refusal to summon additional witnesses under Section 311 CrPC because the witnesses were already known from the beginning, the request was made at the stage of final arguments, and no material showed the evidence was essential rather than dilatory. The supervisory challenge therefore failed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 16 Feb 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=404487