The Kerala High Court has held that when a drawer admits the signature in the cheque, it is immaterial whether some other person had made the entries in the cheque or filled it up. Even if some other person had filled up the cheque, it does not in any way affect the validity of the cheque.
Acting upon a plea, a single judge bench of Justice R. Narayana Pisharadi said that a petition under section 482 CrPC challenging the order of magistrate is not maintainable whereby; the application by the accused to obtain expert opinion on signature on cheque was dismissed. When, neither the complainant nor the accused, has got a plea that the accused herself made the entries in the cheque, it defies comprehension why the cheque should be sent for obtaining an opinion of the expert with regard to the handwriting of the entries in it.
The facts of the case are thus: the petitioner was an accused under section 138 N.I. Act proceedings. When the case reached the stage of defense evidence, the petitioner filed an application in the trial court for sending the cheque to the Forensic Science Laboratory, Thiruvananthapuram to obtain opinion regarding the handwriting of the entries in the cheque. The complainant therafter filed objection to the aforesaid application contending that the intention of the petitioner was only to prolong the case and to cause delay in the disposal of the case.
Justice Pisharadi while dismissing the petition relied on a recent decision of Supreme Court of Bir Singh vs. Mukesh Kumar: AIR 2019 SC 2446, wherein it was held that a meaningful reading of the provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act in particular, Section 20 provides that it is immaterial that the cheque may have been filled in by any person other than the drawer, if the cheque is duly signed by the drawer. If a signed blank cheque is voluntarily presented to a payee, towards some payment, the payee may fill up the amount and other particulars. This in itself would not invalidate the cheque.