JILANI Vs. NASEER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Vyas Desai, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri M.M.Hiremath, learned counsel for the respondent. Perused the records.

(2.) The present petition is filed under Sec. 482 of Cr.P.C. with the following prayer :-

(3.) The brief facts of the case are as under :- A private complaint came to be filed before the Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., Savanur by respondent- Naseer Abdulkhadar Kadaragi. Gist of the complaint averments is that there was a civil suit in O.S.No.42/2014 for partition and in the said suit, compromise was recorded and accepted by the Civil Court stating that the suit is amicably settled among the parties. The complainant is aggrieved by the fact that Abdulgaffarsab Lattewale has received the summons issued by the Court in O.S.No.117/2014 by subscribing signature in English language whereas before the Court when the compromise petition is accepted in o.s. 44/2014, said person has subscribed his left thumb impression and therefore, somebody has been impersonated as Abdulgaffarsab Lattewale and therefore, action was sought against the accused persons. Learned Magistrate after taking cognizance has proceeded with the matter. In the meantime, accused No.3 to 8 have challenged the order of taking cognizance before this Court in this petition contending that the learned Magistrate failed to note that the complainant had the remedy of challenging the very compromise petition before the learned Civil Judge, if it is established that, by parties playing fraud on the Court and there was no criminality involved in the incident and mere averment made by the complainant itself would not be sufficient to take cognizance and therefore sought for quashing of the order taking cognizance and proceeding with the case in C.C.No.187/2016.