MANOJ KUMAR Vs. ANIL AGGARWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN all these petitions, the petitioner assails the order of learned ASJ dated

(2.) 4.2012, whereby the criminal revision petitions against the orders of M.M. dated 11.7.2011 were dismissed. The respondent/complainant had filed as many as nine complaints against the petitioner under Section 138, N.I. Act, before the court of M.M. In all those cases, the petitioner, who was the accused filed applications for leading evidence of Handwriting Expert. The said applications were dismissed by the M.M. vide his orders dated 11.7.2011. The said orders of M.M. were challenged by way of criminal revisions before the ASJ, which came to be dismissed vide the impugned order dated 2.4.2012. 2. The main plea that has been taken to assail those orders is that the complainant had filled up the contents of the cheques and the pro-notes given to the respondent/complainant, who was his partner and that those were misused by filling up the blanks therein, and thus, he was entitled to prove the same by way of the opinion of Handwriting Expert.

(3.) IN view of this dictum and law as laid down in the afore-cited two , judgments, and keeping in view the true spirit of Section 20 and 87 of the N .I. Act, the proof of filling up of these negotiable instruments by the respondent or any person, would not be of any relevance. The petitioner has not disputed his signatures on the said cheques and even in cross-examination. has admitted this fact that the cheques were issued by him and handed over to the complainant alongwith the covering letter. The presumption of issue of cheques for discharge of the liability would arise against the petitioner. Thus, I do not see any propriety or illegality in the orders of the M.M. as also that of the ASJ. The petitions being without any merit are hereby dismissed in limini. Petition dismissed.