Suresh Jain v. Rajesh Rana

CRR-2905-2018 -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH.

Criminal Revision No.2905 of 2018 (O&M) Date of Decision: September 04, 2018 Suresh Jain ......PETITIONER(s).

VERSUS

Rajesh Rana ....RESPONDENT(s).

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA

Present:

Mr. Gaurav Chopra, Advocate for the petitioner (s).

******* SURINDER GUPTA, J.

Heard.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that when there were signatures of complainant on his complaint and Vakalatnama, there was no reason for the Appellate Court to take his specimen signatures while sending the deed of settlement and affidavit for comparison of signatures of complainant. Though the Appellate Court has specifically mentioned in its order dated 06.08.2018 that the signatures of complainant on the deed of settlement and affidavit be compared with his specimen signatures and his signatures on complaint and Vakalatnama in the concluding lines, copy of complaint and Vakalatnama have been referred as disputed documents. It appears that the order of the Appellate Court is explicit regarding the comparison of signatures of complainant-respondent. However, it appears that as a matter of abandoned caution, the Appellate SACHIN MEHTA 2018.09.04 18:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document HIGH COURT, CHANDIGARH

CRR-2905-2018 -2Court has also taken specimen signatures of complainant and sent the same to hand writing expert for comparison with disputed signatures. Specific direction has been issued that the signatures of complainant on deed of settlement and affidavit are to be compared with his signatures on complaint as well as Vakalatnama. In the concluding lines, while describing the deed of settlement and affidavit as disputed documents, the original copy of complaint and Vakalatnama have also been referred as disputed documents, which appears to be only a mistake on the part of Appellate Court, which will in no manner affect report of expert.

The order passed by learned Appellate Court dated 06.08.2018 is to be read as a whole and not in parts. The sense conveyed on perusal of the entire order is clear and unambiguous. The mere fact that specimen signatures have been sent for comparison will not cause any prejudice to petitioner as the signatures of respondent-complainant on complaint and Vakalatnama have already been sent for comparison. Consequently, I find no merits in this petition.

Dismissed.

( SURINDER GUPTA ) September 04, 2018 JUDGE Sachin M.

Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No SACHIN MEHTA 2018.09.04 18:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document HIGH COURT, CHANDIGARH