JUDGMENT Mr. L.N. Mittal, J. (Oral):- Accused Sandeep Jindal has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short – Cr.P.C.), assailing order dated 06.03.2013 (Annexure P-6), passed by Judicial Magistrate, thereby dismissing application (Annexure P-4), moved by the accused for sending the cheque in question to Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) for determining the age of ink. 2. Respondent-complainant has filed complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 alleging dishonour of the cheque in question issued by petitioner-accused. The petitioner, in application (Annexure P-4), alleged that he along with complainant and his son was carrying on business of property in the year 2006-07. The complainant had issued 3-4 signed cheques, in which the amount had also been filled, but the columns of date and payee’s name were left blank. Complainant subsequently filled the said columns. Accordingly, prayer has been made for sending the cheque to FSL to determine the age of aforesaid writing in the cheque. Complainant, by reply (Annexure P-5), resisted the application. The trial Magistrate, vide order Annexure P-6, has dismissed the said application. Feeling aggrieved, accused has filed this petition. 3. I have heard counsel for the petitioner and perused the case file. 4. Counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has already filed petition bearing Crl. Misc. No. M-22326 of 2011 for quashing of impugned criminal complaint, wherein notice of motion was issued vide order dated 26.07.2011 (Annexure P-3) and it would depict that there is prima facie substance in the version of the petitioner. 5. The contention cannot be accepted for the purpose of the instant petition because the petitioner has himself admitted that he not only signed the blank cheque in question, but had also filled the amount therein. In this view of the matter, no useful purpose would be served by sending the cheque to FSL for determining the age of ink for alleged different writings in the cheque. 6. For the reasons aforesaid, I find no merit in the instant petition. Impugned order of the trial Magistrate does not suffer from perversity, illegality or jurisdictional error so as to call for interference by this Court in exercise of inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 7. Dismissed in limine. --------0.B.S.0------------