HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDA RAJULU CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO.359 OF 2010 DATE:14.06.2010 Between: Azra Fatima …….Petitioner And: Sheikh Mahboob Ali and another ……Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDA RAJULU CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO.359 OF 2010 ORDER: This Revision Case is filed questioning judgment dated 29.01.2010 passed by the III Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad in Criminal Appeal No.255 of 2009 by which, order dated 15.07.2009 passed by the XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad in M.P.No.4825 of 2008 was confirmed. The petitioner is the defacto-complainant in C.C.No.423 of 2004. Non-bailable warrant was issued against the 1st respondent/A-1 by the trial court. It is alleged that after obtaining order for recall of non-bailable warrant from this Court, A-1 did not appear before the trial court, but, some one else in the name of A-1 appeared in the trial court and impersonated A-1. Since the alleged offence was committed in the court, the defacto-complainant filed petition in the lower court under Section 340 Cr.P.C for launching prosecution against A-1 for such impersonation. The trial court after going through the material on record came to the conclusion that there was no impersonation of A-1 before that court, and dismissed the petition. As against the said order, the defacto-complainant filed appeal before the lower appellate court. In the appeal, the petitioner/appellant filed Criminal M.P.No.766 of 2009 under Section 391 Cr.P.C for direction to A-1 to produce his original passport before court for verification regarding fraud and impersonation. The lower appellate court by order dated 29.01.2010 allowed the said petition. It is grievance of the petitioner that even though the petition under Section 391 Cr.P.C was allowed by the lower appellate court, the lower appellate court without verification of the passport passed the impugned order dismissing the appeal. After comparison of signatures of A-1 contained in his examination under Section 239 Cr.P.C, on petition filed by A-1 for return of passport, on acknowledgement/receipt of passport, memo of appearance of the Advocate and on personal bond executed by A-1 on 05.11.2001, the trial court confirmed presence of A-1 in that court on that day. The lower appellate court confirmed the said view. Now it is contended by the petitioner’s counsel that if A-1’s passport is verified, then it would be known whether A-1 really came to India on the date of execution of bond for recalling his non-bailable warrant. No doubt, the said verification of passport is one of the modes of confirmation. But, that is not the only mode of confirmation of A-1’s presence in court on the disputed date. Both the courts below came to the conclusion that A-1 was physically present in court and executed the bond for recalling non-bailable warrant against him, after undertaking comparison of signatures of A-1 already contained in the lower court record. Therefore, I do not find any valid reasons for directing the courts below to make further enquiry on this aspect. Hence, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. ____________________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDA RAJULU,J. Date:14.06.2010. GK. THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDA RAJULU CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO.359 OF 2010 Date:14.06.2010 Gk.