On the basis of the above facts, the companyplainant alleged that the Respondents made themselves liable for being prosecuted under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 hereinafter referred to as the IPC .
The police submitted a report stating that the matter appeared to be of a civil nature.
Aggrieved thereby, the Appellant has filed this appeal.
The companyplaint that was filed on 18.11.2008 was sent for investigation under Section 156 3 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.
The Respondents Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by were accused of forgery and preparing false documents on the DEEPAK GUGLANI Date 2019.02.12 155403 IST Reason basis of which a development agreement dated 11.12.2002 came into existence.
The Writ Petition filed by the Respondents against the issuance of process was allowed.
The Respondents filed a revision challenging the issuance of process against them which was dismissed.
The High Court set aside the process issued by the Trial Court as affirmed by the Revisional Court in the Criminal Writ Petition filed by the Respondents.
It was alleged by the companyplainant that her father Shamrao Nalavade expired on 17.01.1994.
NAGESWARA RAO, J. Leave granted.
The Trial Court issued process to the Respondents in the companyplaint filed by the Appellant.
