HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No.7840/2024 Tikam Chand Son Of Lalchand, Residing Behind College, Kumhar Mohalla, Halawar (Raj). ----Petitioner Versus Manish Kumar Goyal, Son Of Shri Ramesh Chand Goyal, Resident Of Jhalrapatan, District Jhalawar (Rajasthan). ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anubodh Jain For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Choudhary, PP JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 09/01/2025 1. The instant criminal misc. petition has been preferred against the impugned order dated 30.01.2024 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No.1, Jhalawar in Criminal Complaint Case No.1666/2019 by which the application filed by the petitioner for sending the cheque to Forensic Science Laboratory for analysis of his handwriting has been rejected. 2. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the petitioner preferred a revision petition before the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Jhalawar, however, the same was also rejected by the impugned order dated 24.10.2024. 3. Aggrieved by both the orders passed by both the courts below, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing this criminal misc. petition. (2 of 3) [CRLMP-7840/2024] 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is an admitted case of the complainant that the petitioner has made an endorsement over the cheque and filled his name. Learned counsel submits that infact the cheque in question was never issued to the complainant. The same was issued to one Manish Rathore. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner is disputing his handwriting over the cheque, hence under these circumstances, the analysis of his handwriting is required to be done by the handwriting expert of FSL. 5. In support of his submissions, he has placed reliance upon the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kanyani Bhaskar Versus M.S. Sampoornam reported in 2007(1) Crimes 106(SC). 6. Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on the record. 7. Perusal of the record indicates that by way of filing an application, a prayer was made by the counsel for the petitioner before the trial court for sending the cheque to FSL for getting the analysis of his handwriting upon the cheque in question. This fact is not in dispute that the petitioner has not denied his signatures on the cheque in question. He has simply denied his handwriting over the cheque. Whether the cheque in question was given to the complainant or not and whether the cheque in question was given to one Manish Rathore are the subject matter of trial which would be decided by the trial court at the appropriate stage. Once this fact is clear on the record that the cheque bears the signature of the petitioner, there is no need to send the same to handwriting (3 of 3) [CRLMP-7840/2024] expert for its analysis. The judgment relied by the counsel for the petitioner in the case of Kanyani Bhaskar (supra) does not help the petitioner as the facts of the said case were altogether different wherein the signatures of the accused were denied by him. Hence, under these circumstances, the interference of this Court is not warranted. 8. This criminal misc. petition is found to be devoid of merits and the same is accordingly dismissed. Stay application as well as all applications (pending, if any) also stand dismissed. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Karan/104