(THIS JUDGEMENT RELATES TO CASE OF FRAUDULENT ADDITION/ALTERATION)
Punjab-Haryana High Court
Saraj Singh @ Bittu Diary Wala vs Kewal Krishan on 28 September, 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CRR 3906-2016 (O&M) Date of decision: 28.09.2017
Saraj Singh @ Bittu Diary Wala …..Petitioner
versus
Kewal Krishan ……Respondent
CORAM: Hon’ble Mr.Justice Kuldip Singh
In addition to the going through the report of the Handwriting and Finger Prints Expert, I have myself gone through the disputed cheque. A perusal of the cheque shows that the date on the cheque is with a different ink. The name of the drawee complainant and the amount mentioned in the words is with the same handwriting. The signatures of the accused are in the same ink which was used for filling the date on the cheque. It is clear to the naked eyes that before the digits 40,000/-, digit ‘1’ has been added with a slightly different ink. There was no reason for the lower Court to discard the opinion of the expert, particularly, when the said addition is visible to the naked eyes. In this case, there was no requirement to take the specimen handwriting of anybody, since the addition is of one stroke which is not comparable by taking specimen handwriting of anybody. The reasoning given by Shri Anil Kumar Gupta, Handwriting and Finger Prints Expert is quite convincing. Therefore, it has to be held that before digits 40,000/-, in the amount box of the cheque, digit ‘1’ was added later on.