JUDGMENT :

Heard Sri Sachida Nand Tripathi, learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri Awadhesh Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the opposite party nos. 2 and 3.

2. By means of this instant criminal revision instituted u/s 397/401 Cr.P.C., the revisionist has assailed the impugned judgement and order dated 02.08.2022 passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate, Basi, Siddharth Nagar in Complaint Case No. 258 of 2005 u/s 245 Cr.P.C. (Tulsi Ram Vs. Indramati and others).

3. By the impugned judgement and order, the trial court has allowed the discharge application filed by the accused u/s 245 Cr.P.C.

4. Averment has been made by learned counsel for the revisionist that the trial court has discharged the accused vide impugned judgement and order without considering the evidence on record. It has been next submitted that complainant had examined the witnesses u/s 244 Cr.P.C. and produced the documentary evidence. There was sufficient reason to frame charge against the accused u/s 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. but the trial court without applying its judicial mind to the evidence on record has illegally discharged the accused u/s 245 Cr.P.C. It has also been submitted that