"A" field a private complaint beofre a first clss magistrate under section 419 & 420 of IPC, against his brother-in-law"B" alleging that in his absence he stolen his original title deed pertaining to land, and thereby without his permission impersonating him by affixing photo of himself i.e"B" photo and forging the signature of "A" sold the property to third party, and basing on his complaint the concern magistrate referred the matter to the P.S. having jurisdition to casue enquiry and to register the FIR, and upon receiving the complaint from the Magistrate, the case was registered againt the "B" FIR registered, Along with "A" his wife and other two panch witnesses were examined and their statments recorded. During the trial IO has admitted the following facts in cross examination that he had during the investigastion has not seized the original sale deed which was alleged to be executed by "B" in favor of third parties, nor witnesesses therunder were examined, further IO has not seen the said original sale deed, and he failed to obtain the full signature of "A" for sending for comparison with that of disputed signature alleged to be foreged by "B" and apart the IO failed to examine the Sub-registrar. In the said circumstanes whether "B:" will be acuitted or not. kindly provide me with suitalbe judgments in given circumstances in faovr accused "B".