Judgment : ( 1 ) THIS application for leave to appeal under Section 378 (4) of the Cr. P. C. against the judgment and order dated 30th may, 2003 passed by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Latehar in Complaint case No. 4 of 1994/trial No. 1533 of 2003 has been preferred by the petitioner after delay of about 25 days O. P. No. 2 was noticed in the matter of limitation and admission. ( 2 ) HAVING heard the counsel for the parties and sufficient cause having been explained, we condone the delay of 25 days. ( 3 ) SO far as merit of the case is concerned, it appears that the petitioner claimed to have purchased the land measuring 18 acres of Plot Nos. 3 and 27 of Khata No. 58 by registered sale deed dated 18th July, 1973 (Exhibit-1) and also claimed to be in possession of the land. It was alleged that the O. P. No. 2 sold the land in question to a 3rd party, namely. Ram Prasad Singh by a sale deed contained in Exhibit 1/a, which constitutes offence under Sections 420, 468 and 504, I. P. C. ( 4 ) FROM the pleadings made by the complainant, it will be evident that the main ground taken by the complainant was that the Hukumnama, on the basis of which the subsequent sale deed was executed, was forged but the learned Court below did not choose to give any finding of the same, as the issue whether the Hukumnama was forged or not, cannot be determined by a criminal Court, except by a Court of civil jurisdiction. ( 5 ) IN the aforesaid circumstance, if the court below has held that the dispute is of a Civil nature and acquitted O. P. No. 2 we find no ground made out to interfere with the judgment in question. This application is dismissed. Application dismissed. --- *** --- .