$~44 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 2163/2025 & CRL.M.A. 9789/2025 SHRI MOHINDER SEKHON .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Anil Panwar, Mr. Tanishq Panwar, Ms. Arushi A. Panwar, Mr. Nikhil Goel, Mr. Sahej Sawhney, Mr. Vibhu Kant, Advs. versus STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Nawal Kishore Jha, APP Mr. Nikhil Rastogi, Mr. Vinod Kumar Mangal and Mr. Natish Dhama, Advs. for R2 (through VC) CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MADHU JAIN O R D E R % 17.07.2026 1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. 2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’) seeking setting aside of the impugned order dated 25.02.2025 in CC No. 1607/2020 titled as Sandeep Goyal v. Mohinder Sekhon passed by the learned JMFC (NI Act) – 01, South West, Dwarka. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite challenging the signatures of the complainant on the complaint, learned Trial Court has refused to send the same for the purpose of seeking the opinion of the This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 22/07/2026 at 12:03:01 Handwriting Expert and a grave miscarriage of justice has been committed by the learned Trial Court. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that as per the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the judgement of T.Nagappa vs. Y.R. Muralidhar., (2008) 5 SCC 633., it was held that the accused has a right to fair trial. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent who appears through video conferencing, submits that there is no purpose in sending the admitted signatures of the complainant to a Handwriting Expert. He further submits that when the complainant himself is admitting his signatures, then no useful purpose shall be served by sending the signatures for the opinion of the Handwriting Expert. 6. Heard the learned counsels for the both the parties and perused the impugned order dated 25.02.2025 passed by the learned Trial Court, the same is reproduced as under: “Ld. Counsel for the accused has moved an application for seeking the opinion of the handwriting expert. Ld. Counsel for the accused submitted that the signature of the complainant on the complaint is forged and fabricated. It is also submitted that signature on the admitted documents of the complainant are different from the signature of the complainant on the complaint. It is also submitted that the complaint and the other documents which contains the admitted signature of the complainant be sent for the purpose of seeking opinion of handwriting expert. Per contra, Ld. Counsel for complainant submitted This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 22/07/2026 at 12:03:01 that accused is adopting delaying tactics by moving this application. Arguments have already been heard. Record Perused. It is pertinent to mention that the Ld. Counsel for the accused has cross-examined the complainant regarding the signature on the complaint and other admitted documents. Moreover, even if it is admitted that the complaint is not containing the signature of the complainant, Ld. Counsel for the accused has got the ample opportunity to cross-examine the complainant on the said aspect when he appeared in the witness box. Hence, this Court is of the view that no fruitful purpose would be fulfilled by seeking the opinion of the handwriting expert in the present case. Copy of the order be given dasti to both the parties. Put up for further proceedings on 01.04.2025.” 7. By way of the application moved by the petitioner in the learned Trial Court, he sought to send the admitted signatures of the complainant for the purpose of seeking the opinion of the Hand Writing Expert. 8. Learned Trial Court has aptly and rightly mentioned that petitioner has already cross examined the complainant regarding his signatures on the complaint and other admitted documents and even if it is admitted that the complaint is not containing the signatures of the complainant, then the learned counsel for the accused got the enough opportunities to examine the complainant on the said aspect. 9. Thus, the learned Trial Court has rightly held that no useful purpose shall be served by seeking the opinion of the Handwriting Expert. There is no This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 22/07/2026 at 12:03:01 infirmity or illegality in the order of the learned Trial Court. 10. The present petition stands dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of. 11. The order be uploaded on the website forthwith. MADHU JAIN, J JULY 17, 2026/ys/P This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 22/07/2026 at 12:03:01