Sandeep Mehta, J. - (1.) The instant miscellaneous petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 8.5.2006 passed by the learned judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sadusahar, district Sri Ganganagar in Criminal Case No. 341 of 2003 as affirmed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Sri Ganganagar vide order dated 7.5.2008 passed in Criminal Revision No. 52 of 2006.
(2.) By the impugned order dated 8.5.2006, the learned Magistrate rejected the application filed by the petitioner under Section 45 of the Evidence Act for sending the cheque to the handwriting expert for examination.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the examination of the cheque in question by a handwriting expert would make the things clear and, thus, the learned trial Judge has committed grave error in rejecting the application filed by the petitioner under Section 45 of the Evidence Act.;