(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 Ss. 191, 192, 196, 463, 464, 465, 467, 470 and 471 read with Sec. 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.