In a special bail application u/s 482 CrPC arising from a cheque dishonour case, the Kerala High Court upheld the lower court's dismissal of a request to call bank documents. The Court held the request was defective as it lacked reference to the account opening period and relevance to the handwriting verification needed by the forensic expert.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR
THURSDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 17TH PHALGUNA, 1939
Crl.MC.No. 8867 of 2017
CMP NO. 4078 OF 2017 IN ST NO. 2011 OF 2013 OF JMFC – 1 , PERINTHALMANNA
PETITIONER(S)
THAJUDHEEN, S/O.MOHAMMED, KARUTHANCHOLA HOUSE, CHETHALOOR, MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.
BY ADV.SRI.V.K.MOHAMMED YOUSUF
RESPONDENT(S):
P. ABDULKADAR S/O.ABOOBAKER, PATHATH HOUSE, ANGADIPURAM, PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
R1 BY ADV. SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. JAYASURYA
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08-03-2018,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 8867 of 2017 ()
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
ANNEXURE I PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMPLAINT BEFORE
THE MAGISTRATE COURT DATED 6-11-2013.
ANNEXURE 2 PHOTOCOPY OF STATEMENT BEFORE THE MAGISTRATE COURT.
ANNEXURE 3 PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER FROM REGIONAL
FORENSIC LABORATORY THRISSUR DATED 1-7-2017.
ANNEXURE 4 PHOTOCOPY OF PETITION DATED 18-11-2017.
ANNEXURE 5 PHOTOCOPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED 25-11-2017.
ANNEXURE 6 PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED 1-12-2017.
B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, J.
Crl.M.C. No. 8867 of 2017
Dated this the 8th day of March, 2018
ORDER
The petitioner is the accused in S.T. No. 2011 of 2013 on the files of the court below. The petitioner filed CMP No. 4078 of 2017 before the court below requesting the court to call for some documents from the Bank. The court below as per Annexure-6 order closed the said application, against which this Crl.M.C has been filed.
-: 2 :-
Crl.M.C. No. 8867 of 2017
the court below directed the petitioner to produce the documents as required by the Forensic Science Laboratory. At that time, the petitioner filed the above CMP seeking for calling for the account opening form and other documents of the petitioner from the Bank. It is not stated in the petition as to when the account was opened. If the account was opened near about the period 2010-2013, the documents sought for can be called for. However, the petition is silent with regard to the same. That apart, whether the petitioner had written as Thajudheen in the said documentS or not is also a relevant aspect. In view of the above reasons, the Court below was justified in closing the above said CMP with a direction to the petitioner to produce the documents sought for by the expert.
In the result, this Crl. M.C. stands dismissed. However, if the petitioner files any fresh petition with the details stated above, the court below shall consider and dispose of the said petition in accordance with law.
Sd/- B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR,
JUDGE.
Ani/26/3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner was justified in seeking call of bank documents unconnected to the specific period of handwriting verification required by the expert.
Whether the petitioner had produced standard signatures near the relevant period to corroborate the handwriting sought for verification.
Thajudheen
P. Abdulkadar
B. Sudheendra Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
