SONU @ VISHAL Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant-accused has filed this criminal revision under section 397 read with section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure being aggrieved by the judgment dated 16.1.2015 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Rehli, District Sagar, in Sessions Trial No.272/2013 whereby charge under sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of the I.P.C. has been framed against the applicant/accused.

(2.) In brief, the relevant facts of the case are that the applicant is friend of co-accused Man Singh. They conspired to prepare forged document with a view to cheat one Roop Singh and Kamod Singh by affixing the photograph of Man Singh and prepared forged documents relating to revenue record of the land belonging to Roop Singh and Kamod Singh and also Rashan card by affixing photograph of Man Singh in place of Roop Singh and Kamod Singh and thereafter opened the account in the HDFC and Oriental Bank, Sagar by introducing Man Singh as Roop Singh in the name of Roop Singh and affixed photograph of Man Singh showing photograph of Roop Singh and also applied in the Bank for issuance of Kisan Credit Card in the name of Kamod Singh and Roop Singh. When these facts came into the notice of complainant Govind, who is brother of Roop Singh and nephew of Kamod Singh, he lodged a report at Police Station Rehli, District Sagar and a crime no.87/13 under sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 of I.P.C. was registered and after investigation charge-sheet was filed against the applicant and coaccused Man Singh and one another. By the impugned order charges under the aforesaid sections have been framed. The legality and validity of the impugned order has been challenged in this revision.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that in the charge-sheet there is no material against the applicant accused. He has not helped the co-accused persons in preparation of forged documents or to get the bank account open on the basis of forged documents, therefore, the proceedings against the applicant is abuse of the process of law and in order to secure the ends of justice, the charge deserves to be quashed.