HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO CRL.R.C.No.101 of 2009 Date: 11th November, 2011 Between: P.Anji Reddy, S/o Late P.Narsi Reddy, 66 years, R/o Janwada village, Shankarpally Mandal, Rangareddy District. ..Petitioner-complainant And 1.Balwender Singh, S/o Satpal Singh …Accused 2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. ..Respondents HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO CRL.R.C.No.101 of 2009 ORDER: This criminal revision case is filed against the Order of the learned VIII-Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberaabad, Rajendranagar, Ranga Reddy District, in Crl.M.P.No.1787 of 2007 in C.C.No.168 of 2007 dated 02.08.2007 allowing the petition filed by the accused under Section 239 of Cr.P.C. The revision petitioner filed a private complaint alleging that the accused forged the signature of his son in the agreement of sale dated 22.06.2000, which is executed in respect of the land in Sy.No.708 of Janwada village of Rajendranagar Mandal and hence the accused has committed the offences under Sections 468, 471 and 420 of I.P.C. The 1st respondent-accused has pleaded that on the basis of the said agreement of sale, he filed O.S.No.154 of 2003 on the file of the V-Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy, against the complainant for specific performance of contract and therefore, the private complaint is not maintainable. The point that arises for consideration is whether the finding of the Court below that the private complaint filed by the revision petitioner is not maintainable and the 1st respondent-accused is entitled for discharge of the offences under Sections 468, 471 and 420 of I.P.C., is legal and sustainable? POINT:: Evidently, the suit for specific performance of agreement of sale was instituted long prior to the filing of the private complaint by the revision petitioner. It is a question of fact to be decided by the Civil Court as to whether the agreement of sale is true or not and as to whether it was a fabricated document. The revision petitioner, if aggrieved, can seek the permission of the Civil Court to prosecute the accused in case the agreement of sale is found to be fabricated and a forged one. Till that date unless a finding is given by the competent Court that the document has been fabricated or forged for the purpose of using it in a Court, the private complaint filed by the revision petitioner herein is nothing but a premature one. Therefore, the Court below has rightly allowed the petition filed by the 1st respondent-accused under Section 239 of Cr.P.C. and dismissed the complaint filed by the revision petitioner as not maintainable. It does not deprive the revision petitioner to prosecute his remedies in Civil Court in case the document is shown to be a fabricated or a forged one. At this stage, there are no grounds to interfere with the order of the Court below. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision case is dismissed. __________________________________ JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO 11-11-2011 Gsn.