Sandeep Mehta, J. - (1.) By way of the instant misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the accused Nitin Soni has approached this Court for challenging the order dated 16.7.2016 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge No.6, Jodhpur Metro dismissing the revision preferred by the petitioner and affirming the order dated 6.7.2015 passed by the learned ACJM No.1, Jodhpur Metro in Cr.Case No.1341/2012 rejecting the application filed by the petitioner under Section 45 of the Evidence Act.
(2.) The petitioner who is an accused in a complaint filed under Section 138 of the N.I.Act moved the said application before the trial court with a receipt Ex.D1 claiming that the respondent executed the said receipt wherein, he acknowledged receiving the cheque amount from the present petitioner. The petitioner has set up a further case that the complainant has misused the cheque and in case, the signatures appearing on the receipt are got compared from the FSL, the true picture will come on record. The complainant contested the said application with the submission that his signatures as appearing on the receipt were forged. The trial court rejected the said application way-back on 10.8.2015. The right of cross-examination of the accused was closed by the trial court on 10.8.2015. The petitioner unsuccessfully challenged the order passed by the trial court by filing a revision which too was rejected on 16.7.2016. Upon making an inquiry about the reason for delay in filing the instant misc. petition, this Court was apprised that the accused has absconded and is not appearing in the trial court thereby, indirectly stalling the trial. This Court feels that getting the signatures as appearing on the receipt compared with the admitted and specimen signatures of the complainant is essential for a just and fair decision of the case but considering the recalcitrant conduct of the petitioner, who has stalled the trial by indirect means, the said prayer can be acceded to only while imposing heavy cost upon the petitioner.
(3.) Accordingly, it is hereby directed that upon the petitioner depositing a cost of Rs.15,000/- in the trial court within a period of 30 days from today and furnishing an undertaking that he shall make no further attempts to delay the trial, the trial court shall forward the receipt Ex.D1 alongwith the admitted and specimen signatures of the complainant to the handwriting expert of the FSL for comparison of signatures appended thereon. Upon the cost being deposited, a sum of Rs.5000/- shall be appropriated therefrom in the funds of the District Legal Services Authority whereas, the remaining amount of Rs.10,000/- shall be paid to the complainant.;