TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (9) TMI 1208
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2019, convicting the petitioners/accused for the offence under Section 138 of N.I. Act and sentenced the first accused firm to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- and sentenced the accused 2 to 4 to undergo six months Simple Imprisonment each and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- each, in default to undergo one month Simple Imprisonment. Challenging the said Judgment of conviction and sentence, the accused have preferred an appeal in Crl.A.No.1 of 2020 and the same is pending on the file of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tiruchirappalli. 4.Pending appeal, the petitioners/accused have filed a petition in Cr.M.P.No.2 of 2021 under Section 293 of Cr.P.C. seeking orders for forwarding the documents exhibited as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.8 to the Nutron Activation Analysis Chemistry Division, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Trombay, Mumbai for examining the age of the ink used in the signatures found in Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.8 compared with the contents filled up in those documents and for sending of the report. 5.The respondent/complainant has filed a counter statement raising serious objections for granting the relief claimed by the petitioners/accused. 6.The learned Principal District and Session....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n the documents will prove that the documents were filled up long after the signing of the same. 9.The defence of the complainant is that the petitioners/accused had raised the issue for the first time, that the accused after losing the case in the trial Court, the petitioners seeking investigation of an expert, at the appeal, is not maintainable and that the above petition has been filed only to drag on the proceedings. The accused have taken a plea that the cheques were not issued on the dates referred by the respondent and the borrowings commenced and continued since 1993, that the complainant had misused the blank cheques and blank pro-notes issued long ago and that the documents signed 11 years ago have been subsequently filled up for filing the frivolous complaint. 10.As already pointed out, the documents marked as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.8, which are all the promissory notes and cheques said to be issued by the accused are sought to be send to Nutron Activation Analysis Chemistry Division, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Trombay, Mumbai for expert opinion. 11.The learned counsel for the petitioners has relied on the decision of the Telangana High Court in J.Purushottam Vs. The Stat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed. '4.At the outset, the petitioner admits his signature in the cheque in question and he only contends that the ink by which the dates and amount filled therein differs. In other words, the petitioner seeks to ascertain the age of the ink by which the dates and amounts were filled in the cheque which cannot be done in view of the decision of this Court reported in (R. Jagadeesan Vs. N. Ayyasamy) (2010 (1) CTC 424). In that decision, this Court held that there is no such facility available in India, especially in Tamil Nadu to compare the age of the ink. In Para Nos.7, 8 and 9 it was held as follows:- 7. In order to ascertain the correctness of the said statement, this Court had requested the learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. N.R. Elango to request either the Director or the Assistant Director, Document Division, Forensic Science Department, Chennai, to be present before this Court to explain the position. Accordingly, today, Mr. A.R. Mohan, Assistant Director, Document Division, Forensic Science Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, Chennai is kind enough to be present before this Court. According to him, he is the Head of the Document Division of the department. On....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....id judgment, at Paragraph Nos.5 & 6 in Panneerselvam's case, this Court held as follows: '5. In the light of the above decision, the Court below is right in rejecting the plea of the petitioner to send the disputed cheque in question for ascertaining the age of the ink or the variation in the ink in the subject matter of the cheque. 6. The Court below also found that if the cheque in question was issued long back, as contended by the petitioner/accused, the same can be proved by way of bank records and therefore also the comparison of the admitted signature and the alleged disputed signature are unnecessary. Such a reasoning assigned by the court below is valid and justified. Further, the petitioner has filed the instant application only after three years from the date of institution of the case by the respondent. In any view of the matter, in the light of the decision of this Court, mentioned supra, the relief sought for by the petitioner cannot be granted. The Civil Revision Petition is therefore dismissed. Consequently, Connected M.P. No. 1 of 2011 is closed.' 7) Though after ascertaining as to whether, there is any expert available in this country, and in p....