https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426173 Revisional interference was declined where the accused had already had sufficient opportunity to produce defence documents and sought to exhibit them only after closure of evidence, when the case stood posted for arguments. The court held that such a late request lacked bona fides and that, in revision, a trial court's choice between two reasonably possible views does not warrant interference; the rejection under section 294 CrPC was upheld without affecting fair trial rights. The court also upheld refusal to send an admitted cheque for forensic examination under section 243 CrPC read with section 45 of the Evidence Act, noting the admitted issuance, signature, firm seal, and underlying liability, and that scientific testing would serve no useful purpose. en-us Fri, 22 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 Aug 2022 08:44:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426173 Revisional interference was declined where the accused had already had sufficient opportunity to produce defence documents and sought to exhibit them only after closure of evidence, when the case stood posted for arguments. The court held that such a late request lacked bona fides and that, in revision, a trial court's choice between two reasonably possible views does not warrant interference; the rejection under section 294 CrPC was upheld without affecting fair trial rights. The court also upheld refusal to send an admitted cheque for forensic examination under section 243 CrPC read with section 45 of the Evidence Act, noting the admitted issuance, signature, firm seal, and underlying liability, and that scientific testing would serve no useful purpose. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 22 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426173