JUDGMENT :

M.R. Shah, J.

By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with sections 397, 482 and 483 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner T has prayed for an appropriate writ, order or direction setting aside the impugned order dated 14/2/2005 passed below application Ex.4 in Criminal Case No.3 of 2004, by the learned Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Surat, by which the learned trial court has passed order of recalling police investigation which was ordered under sec.156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the offences which are non-compoundable namely under sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506(2) read with sec.114 of Indian Penal Code.

2. The No.2 - Surajben widow of Badharsinh alias Babarsinh Chauhan, filed one criminal complaint in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Valod being Criminal Case No.3 of 2004 against the Nos.3 to 8 herein for the serious offences punishable under sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506(2) read with sec.114 of Indian Penal Code alleging inter-alia that the husband of the complainant namely Badharsinh alias Babarsinh Ratanji had expired on 10/6/1967 and the entry to that effect was registered with the Government Office. That the elder brother of the complainant's husband namely Becharsinh Ratansinh T had expired on 11/3/1957 and the entry to that effect was also registered with the office of the Panchayat. That another elder brother of the husband of the complainant namely Kubersinh Ratanji Chauhan had expired on 14/1/1960 but the entry to that effect was not registered and therefore, the complainant sworn an affidavit stating the date of the death; that the father-in-law of the complainant namely Ratanji Bhulabhai Chauhan was having agricultural land bearing Survey No.220 admeasuring about 10 Gunthas, situated at Virpore, Taluka Valod, District Surat and after his death, the name of Becharsinh, Kubersinh and Badharsinh were entered in the revenue record on 27/7/1929 vide Entry No.43. It was further alleged in the complaint that when the complainant got copy of the revenue record in respect of the aforesaid land, she came to know that the name of one Satyajitbhai Ballubhai Desai is entered and when she inquired about the same from the Talati-cum-Mantri, he gave evasive reply. That on further inquiry, she came to know that said Satyajitbhai Ballubhai Desai has created a bogus and forged power of attorney of late Becharbhai Ratanjibhai, Kuberbhai Ratanjibhai and Badharbhai Ratanjibhai in the name of one T Mr.Jaydipbhai Ranchhodbhai Solanki who is a fictitious person. It was further alleged in the complaint that the accused persons have created bogus and forged power of attorney on 29/7/2003 in collusion with each other which is bearing signature of late Kuberbhai, late Babarbhai and late Becharbhai and the said forged power of attorney created by the said Satyajitbhai Ballubhai Desai and one Pavanbhai Durlabhbhai stood as guarantor. It was further alleged that on the basis of said bogus and forged power of attorney, said Jaydipbhai Ranchhodbhai executed registered sale deed on 2/8/2003. Thus, the said Satyajitbhai Ballubhai Desai in collusion with other accused persons created bogus power of attorney of late Babarbhai, late Becharbhai and late Kuberbhai, who have expired long back and created forged sale deed. It was further alleged by the complainant in the complaint that as per her knowledge, accused No.1 has created fictitious persons i.e. accused Nos.2 and 4 and created bogus power of attorney bearing signature of the Government Officials after making signatures of the persons who have expired long back. That sale agreement executed on the basis of bogus power of attorney which was prepared by the accused No.3, T signed by the accused No.1 as purchaser of the stamp, accused No.3 identified the accused No.2 and accused No.5 and accused No.1 have made false and forged signatures and thus created bogus registered sale dee