MANHARBHAI ARVINDBHAI PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been filed by the applicants/accused no.1 and 2 under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity "CrPC") praying to quash and set aside the complaint, being C.R. No. I-200 of 2013 registered with Mahemdabad Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) Brief facts of the complaint are that the applicant no.1 is the elder brother of the complainant and accused no.2 is the mother-in-law of the complainant. Marriage of the complainant was solemnized with Samirbhai Ghanshyambhai Patel, as per Hindu rites, and during their wedlock, one son and one daughter were begotten, but suddenly, husband of the complainant viz., Samirbhai died on 27th July, 2011. During life time of husband of the complainant, her husband was depositing regularly a sum of amount in MIS scheme of Post Office at Mahemadabad as well as in KVP savings scheme also and all such passbooks, receipts of fixed deposits are lying with the applicant no.2. After death of the husband of the complainant, father-in-law and mother-in-law started quarrel with the complainant. Elder brother of the complainant namely Manharbhai was instigating father-in-law and mother-in-law of the complainant as well as children of the complainant against the complainant and on 12th January 2013, they drive her out by exerting mental torture. It is alleged in the complaint that when she inquired from the post office at Mahemadabad in respect of amount deposited by her husband, she was informed by the accused no.3 that by putting signatures, her father-in-law, mother-in-law and elder brother had allegedly withdrawn such amount and they denied to pay any pie to her. Thus, on 31.01.2013 and 04.02.2013; the applicants withdrew money from the account of complainant by forging her signatures. It is further alleged that the applicants had also withdrawn money by using ATM Card of the complainant and such withdrawal in all comes to Rs. 3,58,190/-. Thus, by illegal means, from the account of complainant, accused had withdrawn the funds and that is how, the present complaint has been lodged against the applicants.

(3.) Heard learned advocate Mr. A. R. Rockey for Mr. Nikhil S. Kariel, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicants, learned advocate Mr. Suresh B. Bhatt appearing on behalf of the respondent no.2 and learned APP Mr. Rutvij Oza appearing on behalf of the respondent no.1-State.