Cheque of numerical 1 lac converted to 4 lac

How do you prove that he actually owed Rs 4 lakh

what i find amusing about your story is that you say that you wrote amount in words in front of him. if he was present why didn't he write it himself?

the compainant himself has admitted\disclosed in the FIR that amount in words " one lac only"  was written in front of him.

How do you prove that he actually owed Rs 4 lakh:

There is no denying on liability part. The total  amount receivable is 7 lacs, all sale bills have been admitted by the complainant. There are total 7 cheques including this 4 lac cheque amounting to 7 lacs. the compainant says that he has paid in cash againt these cheques but has not taken back the cheques in good faith. Receivers signature are forged on all cash vouchers prepared by him in his own handwriting without any revenue stamp and exceeding 20K, the limit set by Income tax.

But the problem in my case, i wish that charges are not framed. Whether i should approach high court for quashing of FIR and the case since the case has not been investigated properly from my angle. Only cash voucher for one lac was sent for FsL while as per me, cheque amount is 4 lac and there are cash vouchers for balance amount of 3 lacs also which have not been sent for FSL. One thing more is out of all numericals, numerical 4 cannot be written without overwriting or additional  stroke. numerical 4 cannot be written in continuation as all other numericals. Further my audited balance sheets show the outstanding of compalinant while his accounts are not audited and he is a defaulter with IT deptt and not been filing IT returns since last 6 years. Futher the IO has not presented my signatures and L stroke sample in the chargesheet which he had taken from me in presence of judge.  At the present stage, we have asked for reinvestigation from our angle. Kindly advise. Is there any instance or judgement in this type of case.

My counsel has already  moved an application for reinvestigation. He tried to convince the judge that numeric 4 cannot be made without additional stroke or overwriting, but as i can see the judge, despite being very intelligent and upright, will frame charges i presume. Judge despite the fact that there was no alteration in amount in words from one to four was bent upon considering the FSL report showing additional stroke in numeric 4 although no change in ink. In case charges are framed, naturally we will move to high court for relief.

It seems that you and your counsel seems to be over confident .and your opponent quick and smart.

Do not wait for charge to be framed move now to HC for quash of FIR.

If charge is framed you have to seek bail for which lower court has no power so you have to immediately move Dt  court for bail first.and  if rejected you have to go to HC.

There is no power to any criminal court to revise its own order only remedy is to move higher court.first and fast.

My advocate has now sited that there is the separate provision in Cr.P.C. i.e. 195 Cr.P.C. pertains to the prosecution for the offence related to the documents given in Evidence or in judicial proceeding and for which separate mandatory procedure has to be adopted provided under section 340 Cr.P.C.Hon’ble Supreme Court in case titled M.S.Ahlawat vs State of Harana AIR 2000 SC 168 specifically held that section 340 Cr.P.C. prescribed the procedure as to how a complaint may be preferred under section 195 Cr.P.C. while under section 195 Cr.P.C. it is open to the court before which the offence was committed to prefer a complaint for the prosecution of the offender. Provisions under section 195 Cr.P.C. are mandatory and no court can take cognizance of offences referred to therein. As in my case cheque alleged to be forged was procures from judicial record of caseU/s 138 filed by me, is FIR not bound to ba cancelled on this ground.Kindly advise.