AMAR SARAN, J. - (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A.
(2.) AN order dated 29.11.2007 passed by the C.J.M., Mathura, framing charges against the applicant and others in Crimi ­nal Case No. 5008 of 2004, has been chal ­lenged by means of this application. It is the contention of the learned Counsel for the applicant that there is abso ­lutely no evidence against him and even if the material collected by the Investigating Officer is taken in to, no prima facie case is disclosed.
(3.) I find that earlier an application has been moved on 6.2.2004 by the appli ­cant and others before the C.J.M. seeking discharge. An Order dated 5.11.2007 was passed on the said application refusing to discharge the applicant and co -accused and so far as the applicant was concerned, his Counsel had pleaded that there was no evidence in the case. However, it was pointed out that the applicant Vinay Chaturvedi was the purchaser of the said property. It was observed in the said order that the complainant Kailash Bhadauria filed the complaint against the applicant, Prithvi Singh, Mohan Lal and Kanhaiya that they had got a fake power of attorney exe ­cuted in the name of Mohan Lal of the prop ­erty belonging to his late grand -father by setting up another person as Mohan Lal and got the forged sale deed registered, thereby committing offences under sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC. The Investigating Officer had submitted a charge -sheet against the appli ­cant and others, but had excluded the name of Vinod Kumar from the same.;