ORDER

1. A complaint was lodged complaining that a Memorandum of Understanding (“MoU”) had been entered into on 03.02.2010, under which 43% of the built-up area should be conveyed to the landowners i.e., the complainant, and that the builder was entitled to the remaining 57%. However, the builder had conveyed all the flats that he had constructed without discharging his obligation of conveying 43% of the built-up area to the landowners.

2. In the complaint, it was also stated that the builder in order to secure loans from the banks had forged the signatures of the landowners in the indemnity bonds that had been submitted to the banks, on the basis of which loans had been raised.

3. On the basis of this complaint, a crime was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 471, 420, 465, 468 r/w Section 34 of the IPC.

4. Being aggrieved of this registration of crime, the present petition has been filed.

5. Sri.Sharath S Gowda–learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contends that the entire set of allegations in the complaint are directed against accused No.1 i.e., Praveen Kumar D–the Managing Partner of the builder, and that the petitioner is only a partner and the allega