Sunil Kumar Shaw vs Chetan Kumar Daiya
2023 Latest Caselaw 2831 Ori

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                                   CRLMC No. 1437 of 2019



            Sunil Kumar Shaw                           ....            Petitioner
                                             Mr. Manoranjan Mishra, Advocate
                                          -versus-
            Chetan Kumar Daiya                       ....       Opposite Party
                                                                          None

            CORAM:
            THE CHIEF JUSTICE
                                         ORDER

Order No. 05.04.2023

10. 1. The challenge in the present petition is to an order dated 2nd May, 2019 passed by the JMFC, Barbil rejecting an application made by the present Petitioner-Accused in ICC Case No.52 to 2017 to send the handwriting of both parties and the cheques in question to a handwriting expert.

2. Relying on the decision of this Court in M/s. Suvika Distributors Pvt. Ltd. v. M/s. S.R. Retail Zone Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 70 OCR 51, it is sought to be contended that since the signature of the Accused on the cheque in Hindi, it is imperative that the handwriting should be verified and his request ought not to have been refused by the learned trial Court.

3. The learned JMFC has in the impugned order come to a conclusion that there was no ambiguity or doubt regarding the signature which warranted sending the signatures of the parties to a handwriting expert.

4. The trial Court is in the best position to assess the need for request made by the Petitioner. Cogent reasons have been given for refusing the request.

5. It is seen that the case was at the stage of pronouncement of judgment when the interim order was passed by this Court on 8th August, 2019. It is only the pendency of the present petition and the interim order therein that is preventing the judgment from being pronounced.

6. The Court is not satisfied that any ground is made out for interference. The petition is accordingly dismissed. The interim order passed earlier stands vacated.

7. A copy of this order be communicated to the concerned Subordinate Court forthwith.

(Dr. S. Muralidhar) Chief Justice

S.K. Jena/Secy.