2018 (7) TMI 2079

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....led as M/s Bhushan Power & Steel Limited Vs. M/s P.L.Forgings Pvt. Limited and others. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that reasoning assigned for the purpose of entertaining the petitioners application for examination of handwriting expert stated in para 3 is arbitrary and illegal. Such reasoning could be taken at the time of passing final order if any. There is no hurdle for examination of handwriting expert in respect of a particular document. 3. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent while resisting the contention of learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that there is no 1 of 4 error committed by the JMIC, Chandigarh in Annexures P1 and P2. Learned counsel for the petitioner relied on Section 20 of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of an offence triable by him does not exceed his powers under Section 243(2) if, in the interest of justice, he directs to send the document for enabling the same to be compared by a 2 of 4 handwriting expert because even in adopting this course, the purpose is to enable the Magistrate to compare the disputed signature or writing with the admitted writing or signature of the accused and to reach his own conclusion with the assistance of the expert. The appellant is entitled to rebut the case of the respondent and if the document viz. the cheque on which the respondent has relied upon for initiating criminal proceedings against the appellant would furnish good material for rebutting that case, the Magistrate having declined to send the docu....