- (1.) S. K. Agarwal, J. Heard learned Counsel for the applicants and learned A. G. A.
(2.) IN my opinion, the order of the revisional Court does not suffer from any infirmity. The Magistrate has rejected the application under Section 156 (3) Cr. P. C. made by the opposite party on the sole ground that a civil suit is pending between the parties, therefore, the proceedings under the criminal charges is to viable. However, I find no fault with the finding advanced by the learned Sessions Judge that the order of the Magistrate is not justified. The law as it stands till date does not bar prosecution of any offender by any person even though civil suit with respect to the doubtful document which constitutes the offence is pending. The two proceedings are independent from each other and pending civil suit cannot apply as any bar to the prosecution for the offences alleged regarding fabricating of the impugned document. Such a prosecution is not barred even by Section 195 Cr. P. C. In the circumstances, I do not find any valid reason to admit this revision. This revision is, therefore, rejected. In the event of arrest of these applicants, after the case is registered and investigation proceeds with, if they appear before the Court or they are produced and on their making an application for bail, the prayer for bail shall be considered as expeditiously as possible by the Courts below. Revision rejected. .;