Hon’ble Aditya Nath Mittal, J.—Heard learned counsel for the revisionists and learned A.G.A. Opposite party No. 2 (in person) has argued her matter.

This Criminal Revision has been filed against the order dated 23.2.2010 passed by III Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gautam Budh Nagar in case No. 1423 of 2009 by which the revisionists have been summoned to face the trial for the offence punishable under Sections 467, 468 and 471 I.P.C.

2. Learned counsel for the revisionists has submitted that the present dispute is of civil nature and no forgery has been committed by the revisionists but the Court below has committed manifest error in passing the summoning order. It has also been submitted that the opposite party No. 2 had executed power of attorney and an agreement to sell regarding which a civil suit No. 584 of 2005 was filed but because the agreement to sell was unregistered, therefore the relief of specific performance was not granted but the Civil Court vide its judgment dated 27.3.2010 has directed to refund the amount of Rs. 7,64,795/- alongwith interest of 6%. It has also been submitted that the said judgment of the Civil Court was challenged by both the parti