IMPORTANT POINT
The High Court retains inherent powers under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to prevent miscarriages of justice, even when revisional powers are restricted by Section 397(3).

JUDGMENT :

Rakesh Kainthla, J.

1. The petitioner has filed the present petition for setting aside the order dated 9^th September 2024 passed by the learned Sessions Judge Chamba (learned Revisional Court), vide which the order dated 17.1.2023, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class Dalhousie (learned Trial Court) was upheld. (The parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience.)

2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition are that the complainant filed a complaint before the learned Trial Court under Section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C. It was asserted that the complainant is a permanent resident of Balloon Bazaar, Dalhousie District, Chamba. He is facing proceedings under the Public Premises Act before the Estate Officer, Dalhousie Cantonment Board. The complainant applied for the demarcation of property No. 7, bearing survey No. 95, Balloon Bazaar, Dalhousie Cantonment. A document was prepared on 27^th October 1997, showing the spot position. This document was signed by the complainant. A certified copy of the document was also issued to the complainant by the Executive Officer. The complainant obtained a certified copy of the document and found that this copy was different from the earlier one. The proceedings were initiated based on the altered copy by using it as genuine. Therefore, it was prayed that the present application be allowed and the matter be sent to the SHO Police Station, Dalhousie, for registration of the FIR.

3. The learned Trial Court held that the averments in the application disclosed a dispute of a civil nature. The documents on record were certified copies, therefore, the learned Trial Court dismissed the application filed by the complainant.

4. Being aggrieved by the order passed by learned Trial court, the complainant filed a revision, which was decided by learned Sessions Judge Chamba (learned Revisional Court). Learned Revisional Court concurred with the findings recorded by learned Trial Court that the dispute between the parties was civil and dismissed the revision preferred by the complainant.

5. Being aggrieved by the orders passed by learned Courts below, the complainant has filed the present petition asserting that the learned Courts below erred in appreciating the dispute pending before them. The complainant had contended that the information supplied to him was not in consonance with the original demarcation map of 1997. There were interpolations, additions and alterations. The learned Courts below did not call for the original demarcation map to compare it with the certified map supplied by the accused to the complainant. The learned Revisional Court put the onus upon the petitioner to call for the original record from the Cantonment Board. The complainant did not have any opportunity to call for the record, as the same can be called while examining the witnesses. The complainant had filed the documents obtained by him under the Right to Information Act, which showed the alterations. It was wrongly held that the dispute was civil. Therefore, it was prayed that the present petition be allowed, orders passed by learned courts below be set aside, and direction be issued to the concerned SHO to investigate the matter, hence the petition.

6. I have heard Mr. Dheeraj Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the complainant/petitioner. He submitted that the learned Courts below erred in dismissing the application. The complainant had specifically asserted in the application that the documents supplied to him were altered. This disclosed the forgery, and the matter should have been sent to the police for investigation. Learned Courts below wrongly held that the matter was civil in nature. Hence, he prayed that the present petition be allowed, the orders passed by learned Courts below be set aside, and the application be sent to the Police for registration of the FIR.

7. I have given considerable thought to the su