IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA SLA No.18 of 2009 LALMANI DEVI Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. KAMTA SINGH 3. RAMASHIS SINGH ---- 3. 12.02.2009 Heard. The complainant-petitioner takes except to the judgment and order of acquittal dated 18.9.2008 recorded by the lower appellate court in Cr.Appeal No.162 of 2007. It appears that the complainant (P.W.3) made a complaint alleging therein that the accused including O.P.Nos.2 & 3 had got a forged deed of gift executed in their favour by her father, namely, Late Raja Singh. Raja Singh had two brothers, namely, Sheetal Singh and Nand Singh. O.P.No.2 and 3 herein are the sons of Nand Singh. As per allegations in the complaint, the deed of gift was executed by Raja Singh as well as the widow of Sheetal Singh who died issueless. Learned trial court on conspectus of evidence brought on record found the opposite parties herein guilty under section 418/120B IPC and accordingly sentenced them. Aggrieved by the said judgment and order O.P.Nos.2 and 3 herein preferred Cr. Appeal No.162 of 2007. The learned lower appellate court found that from the evidence of P.W.4 (husband of the complainant) it is apparent that a title suit has already been filed by them for declaring/setting aside the said deed of gift. - 2 - Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner also admits the said fact before this court. In that view of the matter, the consideration made by the lower appellate court cannot be faulted. Further, this Court finds that adequate reasons have been assigned by the learned lower appellate court for acquitting the O.P.Nos.2 and 3 herein. The lower appellate court in paragraph 14 concluded as under: “It is also admitted fact in the case that the prosecution has not been able to compare the L.T.I. of Raja Singh on the said deed of gift with any admitted L.T.I. to show whether it was L.T.I. of Raja Singh or some body else on the said deed of gift. It is also admitted that Title Suit no.32/05 is pending in the court of Munsif, Gaya in which the aforesaid deed of gift is in dispute and the civil court is competent authority to determine the genuineness of the aforesaid deed of gift.” In view of the facts noticed above, this Court finds no patent illegality in the judgment and order which is sought to be appealed against by filing the present application. The application seeking leave to appeal has not merit which is accordingly dismissed.. This Court, however, observes that the result of the present litigation shall not prejudice the case of the plaintiffs of Title Suit No.32/05. hr ( Kishore K. Mandal )