1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. Criminal Application No. 1839/2010 Sheshrao s/o Parbatrao Pandhare and 3 ors. V/s. Damodhar s/o Kukaji Pandhare and anr. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's Orders. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. R. S. Kurekar, advocate for applicant. Mr. B. N. Mohta, advocate for respondent no.1. Mr. D. B. Yengal, APP for respondent no. 2. Coram: A.P. Bhangale, J Dated : 15th June 2011 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The applicants by this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure questioned the order dated 03/09/2007 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Risod in Criminal Case No. 02/2002 as also the order dated 11/03/2010 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Washim in Criminal Revision No. 104/2007 whereby the cognizance was taken in respect of the offence punishable under Section 468 of the Indian Penal Code on the ground of prima facie case was made out against the accused. The order passed by the learned 2 Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Risod was challenged in Criminal Revision No. 104/2007 was dismissed. The learned advocate for the applicants contended in view of the ruling in case of Gopal s/o Ramchandra Abewal and Anr V/s. State of Maharashtra and Ors reported in 2008 ALL MR (Cri) 346 the Court can not take cognizance under Section 195 of Cr.P.C. when dispute civil in nature is pending in the Competent Civil Court and that Court shall decide as to whether the document is really forged or producer thereof has committed an offence. It appears that the learned Additional Sessions Judge, did consider this ruling and taken into consideration that the Special Civil Suit No. 12/2001 is pending in the Court of District Judge, Washim which was subsequent to the filing of the complaint. 3. In other words, the cognizance of the offence punishable under Section 468 of Indian Penal Code has already been taken and I am informed that charge is also framed. That being so, the applicants can invite decision on merits in the trial to be held pursuant to the charge framed. For all these reasons, there is no merit in the Criminal Application and hence it is dismissed. JUDGE Punde