1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4026 OF 2008 Ramdas s/o Murlidhar Rode .. Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra and ors. .. Respondents Shri K.S.Bhore, Advocate for applicant Shri K.J.Ghute Patil, A.P.P. for respondent No.1 Respondents 2 to 6 served CORAM : P.V. HARDAS, J. DATE : 26th February 2010 PER COURT 1. This application has been filed by the applicant seeking to challenge the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Jamkhed, dated 18.10.2008 below Exh.27 in R.T.C.No.131/2005 and also to quash and set aside the aforesaid trial i.e. R.T.C.No.131/2005 pending on the file of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Jamkhed, District Ahmednagar. 2. The essential contention of the applicant before me is that on perusal of the original complaint which was filed by the respondents, at Exh.A, before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Jamkhed does not disclose the commission of an offence punishable under Sections 420, 465, 471 read with sec.34 of the Indian Penal Code. My attention has 2 been invited to paragraph 3 of the said complaint at Exh.A. Upon perusal of the aforesaid paragraph, it is apparent that necessary averment in respect of commission of offence punishable under Sections 420, 465, 471 read with sec.34 of the Indian Penal Code has been made out. In that light of the matter, therefore, no interference at all is called for in respect of quashing of the aforesaid R.T.C.No.131 of 2005. Along with this application charge-sheet, if filed has not been annexed. 3. The another challenge is to an order dated 18.10.2008 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class in the aforesaid pending criminal case. An application at Exh.27 came to be filed on behalf of the prosecution contending before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class that during investigation the finger impression of Vimal Anna Korde as well as finger impression of Kausalyabai Mahadeo Pote ought to have been referred to the finger print expert during investigation but was not done so by the Investigating Officer. The Assistant Public Prosecutor, therefore, sought necessary permission from the Judicial Magistrate, First Class to refer the said impressions to the finger print expert. The present applicant, who is an accused in the said trial, it appears had objected to the request of the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor before the trial Court. The trial Court in the impugned order referred to some orders passed below Exh.35 and directed the Sub-Registrar, Jamkhed to produce the necessary relevant registers in respect of the sale deed dated 13.11.2001 executed in favour of the present applicant. The Sub-Registrar had accordingly produced 3 the register containing the thumb impressions. The accused undisputedly had not produced the original sale deed though it appears that the accused had stated that he would produce the original sale deed. In that light of the matter, therefore, the trial Court directed that the finger impressions obtained during investigation and the finger impressions appearing in the register of the Sub-Registrar pertaining to Vimal Anna Korde and Kausalyabai Mahadeo Pote be referred to the finger print expert for examination. In respect of the aforesaid order, Shri Bhore, learned Counsel for the applicant has urged that the sale deed is being challenged not by either Vimal Anna Korde or Kausalyabai Mohadeo Pote but by the present respondents. That can hardly be a ground for challenging the order passed by the trial Court. It appears that a charge- sheet has been filed and the accused is facing trial for an offence punishable under Sections 420, 465, 471 read with sec.34 of the Indian Penal Code. As pointed out by me earlier, the complaint certainly prima facie discloses the commission of the offence and in that light of the matter no interference is called for in the present application. 4. Accordingly, this application which is sans merit is, therefore, summarily dismissed with no costs. ( P.V. HARDAS, J.) (vvr/4026.08criappln) 4