<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2011 (2) TMI 1616 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305056</link>
    <description>In a cheque dishonour prosecution, the HC held that the accused could seek forensic examination of the disputed cheque, including ink-age testing and comparison with an admitted signature, where such examination was relevant to the defence under the Evidence Act and fair trial considerations. The Court noted earlier views doubting scientific capability to determine ink age, but accepted that a later order had recognised forensic facility at Hyderabad and had directed examination of disputed documents. The accused was therefore given an opportunity to produce an admitted signature from the same period, and the contrary orders of the courts below were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 01 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Nov 2022 16:20:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=695744" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (2) TMI 1616 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305056</link>
      <description>In a cheque dishonour prosecution, the HC held that the accused could seek forensic examination of the disputed cheque, including ink-age testing and comparison with an admitted signature, where such examination was relevant to the defence under the Evidence Act and fair trial considerations. The Court noted earlier views doubting scientific capability to determine ink age, but accepted that a later order had recognised forensic facility at Hyderabad and had directed examination of disputed documents. The accused was therefore given an opportunity to produce an admitted signature from the same period, and the contrary orders of the courts below were set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305056</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>