N.L.Untwalia, J.

1. The petitioner, according to the allegations against him, filed a plaint in the name of his father, Ramji Sao, by forging his signature on the Vakalatnama as also on the plaint. That plaint was registered and numbered as Title Suit 1 of 1956, Ultimately, the suit was withdrawn on 11-5-1957 but the opposite party who was the defendant in the suit filed an application for prosecution of the petitioner for committing forgery on the plaint as also on the vakalatnama. This application was rejected by the Court of first instance, but on appeal under Section 476-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the appellate Court has directed the complaint to be filed against the petitioner for forgery. Two points have been urged before me in support of this application by Mr. Prem Lall.

His first submission is that on the facts and in the circumstances of this case the petitioner had not committed an offence of forgery. For this, he placed reliance upon Aparti Charan Ray V/s. Emperor, AIR 1930 Pat 271. His. second submission is that since the petitioner was not a party to the suit which had been filed in the name of Ramji Sao, no complaint can be lodged against him for fo