JUDGMENT :

B.R. GAVAI, J.

1. The appeal arises on a very narrow canvass.

2. The appellant had filed a complaint against the respondents alleging that the respondents had committed the offence punishable under Sections 191, 192, 196, 463, 464, 465, 467, 470 and 471 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short “IPC”).

3. The main allegation made by the appellant is that respondent No. 2 Ramprasad Pancheshwar had prepared false and forged documents, namely, personal recognizance bond and surety bond in Criminal Case No. 19 of 2003 and the rest of the respondents conspired and actively helped respondent No. 2 for forging the said documents.

4. It is the case of the appellant that those documents had been eventually filed on record in Criminal Case No. 19 of 2003 pending against the appellant before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ramtek (hereinafter referred to as the “JMFC”).

5. The learned Judicial Magistrate First Class vide order dated 6th November 2004 dismissed the complaint. Being aggrieved thereby, the revision petition came to be filed.

6. Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur vide order dated 14th March 2005 has held that such a complaint could not have be