HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 11119 of 2025 Court No. - 85 HON'BLE VINOD DIWAKAR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State, and perused the material available on record. 2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking to set aside the impugned order dated 21.01.2025 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division)-II, Hapur in Complaint Case No.145 of 2024 (Vinay Tyagi vs. Ajay Kumar Mittal), as well as the order dated 30.06.2025 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Hapur in Criminal Revision No.26 of 2025, and to allow the application dated 12.12.2024 moved by the petitioner for sending the disputed cheque for handwriting/forensic examination in the aforesaid complaint case, registered at Police Station Hapur Nagar, District Hapur. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner had moved an application dated 12.12.2024 before the trial court in Complaint Case No.145 of 2024, wherein the petitioner has been summoned to face trial under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. It is contended that the said application sought reference of the disputed cheque to a handwriting/forensic expert to establish the alleged alteration on the cheque. It is further submitted that the petitioner had taken a sum of Rs.15 lakhs as a loan and had issued three cheques of Rs.5 lakhs each towards discharge of the said liability. While two of the cheques were duly honoured, it is alleged that in the third cheque, the opposite party no.2 had interpolated the figure '5' to '15' to claim a higher amount, although the petitioner admits his signature on the cheque to the extent of Rs.5 lakhs only. 4. It is further urged that such interpolation amounts to forgery for wrongful Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Raj Kumar Kesari Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Ajay Kumar Mittal .....Petitioner(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) financial gain. It is argued that the learned trial court has erroneously relied upon the judgment in Oriental Bank of Commerce vs. Pramod Kumar Tiwari to reject the petitioner's application, and the revisional court has mechanically affirmed the said order without appreciating the specific allegation of forgery raised by the petitioner. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and upon perusal of the photocopies of the cheques annexed to the petition as well as the impugned orders passed by the courts below, this Court is of the view that a fair opportunity ought to be afforded to the petitioner to substantiate his plea of interpolation/forgery. Accordingly, the learned Magistrate concerned is directed to send the disputed cheque to the Forensic Science Laboratory for examination on the specific query of alleged alteration, and shall not proceed to pass any final judgment in the matter till the receipt of the report from the Forensic Science Laboratory. 6. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the petition stands disposed of. September 17, 2025 Sharad/- (Vinod Diwakar,J.) A227 No. 11119 of 2025 2 Digitally signed by :- SHARAD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad