KRISHNA KUMAR, J. - (1.) THIS revision has been filed against order dated 19 -3 -1999 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Moradabad in Criminal Revision No. 306 of 1998 whereby setting aside the order of the learned trial Court.
(2.) HEARD learned Counsel for the par ­ties. Learned Counsel for the revisionist contended that this case is pending for the last 16 years and the evidence of the prosecution was concluded in the year 1993 when the case was ripe for disposal, the complainant moved applica ­tion only to delay the disposal of this case and 7 years have further passed. It is con ­tended that the trial Court took this fact into consideration and rejected the ap ­plication of the complainant moved through Public Prosecutor. However, the said order of the learned trial Court was set aside by the learned Additional District Judge without any sufficient ground and further, there was no illegality in the order of the trial Court.
(3.) IT is contended that the admitted hand -writing is the best piece of evidence for comparision by the Expert and in case, the said documents were not sufficient for comparision, other papers could also have been sent for comparision because the accused was principal of the Institution and there could be hundred of documents written in the hand writing of accused and there was no reason for sample hand -writ ­ing. It is also contended that once the order was passed by the Court on 8 -10 -1996 for sending the admitted documents for com ­parision, the sample hand -writing could not be sent.;