HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 3603 of 2024 Court No. - 93 HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A for the State, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and perused the material on record. 2. The present revision has been filed against the order dated 05.06.2024 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bijnor, in Criminal Case No. 3860 of 2009 (State Vs. Devendra Singh and Others), arising out of Case Crime No. 1070 of 2008, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC, Police Station Kotwali City, District Bijnor by which the discharge application of the revisionist has been dismissed and the order has been passed for framing of charge. 3. Learned counsel for the revisionist has submitted that sale deed, which was executed in the year 1983 is based upon power of attorney, executed in the name of revisionist namely Devindra Singh and the said power of attorney was executed by duly authorized person i.e. informant and the same power of attorney was signed by the son of the informant. Learned counsel for the revisionist has further submitted that the present dispute involved is that of civil nature and is tried to be converted into criminal case. Learned counsel for the revisionist has submitted that initially a final report was submitted, but thereafter further investigation was conducted and the charge- sheet has been submitted against the revisionist and his wife. Learned counsel for the revisionist has further submitted that the said power of attorney though, not registered, but it is a valid document in the eye of law, as the same has been executed by the owner and title holder of the property namely Smt. Tripat Kaur Sacchar-informant. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 has submitted that, the said power of attorney is forged document, which has been prepared by the revisionist and submitted that on the said document thumb impression is Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Mahipal Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Devindra Singh .....Revisionist(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) not of the informant, but of some one else. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 has further submitted that, so far as his son is concerned, after getting marriage, he has gone to America and did not return back and thereby the said power of attorney executed in the year 1983 has been prepared fraudulently and has been misused in order to grab the property of the informant. Learned counsel for the revisionist has lastly prayed that the present revision is devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed. 5. Since the charge-sheet in this case has been filed and the matter is at the stage of framing of charge. The nature of evidence in the present case appears to be documentary in nature, that is correctness of document, correctness of thumb impression and signature of the informant's son, which is subject matter of evidence and trial, hence, during the course of trial the revisionist will have sufficient opportunity to get the said thumb impression and signature of the informant's son be verified from the experts, and may move such application before the trial court, which is still open to the revisionist. Moreover, the present case involves a mixed question of oral and documentary evidence, which can only be decided by conducting trial in the matter, hence, no ground is left with the revisionist and the revision is liable to be dismissed. 6. The present revision is devoid of merit and is accordingly, dismissed. 7. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. September 24, 2025 Vikram CRLR No. 3603 of 2024 2 (Harvir Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIKRAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad