VISHWANATH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 9 have invoked jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Cr.P.C.', for short) seeking quashing of the complaint in PC No.64/2017 pending on the file of the learned Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Hunagund and Crime No.109/2017 registered in Ilkal Town Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 465, 471 and 120B read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the 'IPC.', for short)

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned counsel for respondent No.2 and the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1-State.

(3.) The facts of the case are that, respondent No.2 filed a private complaint in PC No.64/2017 before the learned Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Hunagund, against the petitioners for offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 471 and 120B read with Section 149 of IPC stating that the complainant is the adopted son of Sri. Keereppa, son of Leshappa Ari and Smt. Lokamma K. Ari, resident of Ilakal. The complainant/respondent No.2 was adopted by them as per their community rituals and customs prevailing in their community in the presence of the relatives and elders of the family. On 10.07.1999, as per the provisions of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, through his genitive parents namely Sri. Pundalikappa, S/o Giri Mallappa Ari and Smt. Radhabai P. Ari and in memory of said adoption, they got executed a registered adoption deed dated 19.07.1999 by Smt. Lokamma K. Ari before the Sub- Registrar's Office. Since then, respondent No.2 is known and identified as adopted son of Sri. Keereppa Isehapa Ari and Smt. Lokamma K. Ari not only among their family but also by the neighbours, society and the entire Ilkal town including the accused. The said Sri.Keereppa died on 08.09.1991 and Smt.Lokamma K. Ari died on 21.02.2002. The complainant/respondent No.2 being the adopted son, succeeded to the properties left by his adoptive parents. Originally Sri.Ieshappa son of Basappa Ari was the original owner of the property bearing CTS No.2357 measuring 96.99 sq.mts situated at Ilkal town. He died long back on 17.03.1971 leaving behind him his two sons namely Vithappa and Sri. Keereppa to inherit and succeed to his property. Sri.Vithappa and Sri.Keereppa became the joint owners and possessors of the said property having undivided 1/2 share. Sri.Vithappa died on 26.12.2012 and Keereppa died on 08.09.1991. The petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 being sons of Sri Vithappa inherited and succeeded to his half share and the complainant being adopted son of Sri. Keereppa inherited and succeeded to his half share. Recognizing the rights of the complainant and accused Nos.1 to 3, the Deputy Tahsildar, Ilkal, issued the surving family certificate dated 05.10.2013. All the accused knows very well that complainant is the adopted son of Sri. Keereppa Ari and is having undivided half share in the property bearing CTS No.2357 measuring 96.99 sq.mts situated at Ilkal town. The approximate market value is not less than one crore rupees. Respondent No.2 heard rumor about one year back that, petitioner No.3/accused No.3 has alienated the said property in favour of petitioner No.4/accused No.4. Surprised by the said rumour, respondent No.2 verified the documents pertaining to said property and came to know that all the accused designed criminal conspiracy i.e. to grab the half share of the complainant in the said valuable property and created a false and forged panchanama dated 14.11.2013 and also a registered sale deed dated 04.04.2014. Petitioner No.4/accused No.4 is the purchaser and petitioner Nos.1 to 3/accused Nos.1 to 3 are the vendors. Petitioners 5 to 7/accused Nos.5 to 7 are the witnesses to the panchanama dated 04.04.2014. It is stated that all the petitioners hatched plan to grab the valuable property rights of respondent No.2 worth Rs.50,00,000/- and created a false and fraudulent panchanama dated 14.11.2013 and thereafter got transferred the rights in favour of accused Nos.1 to 3 and further created a fake and bogus sale deed in favour of accused No.4 and the said act amounts to cheating and forgery. The said complaint has been filed for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 465, 466, 471 and 120B read with Section 149 of IPC.