P SAKTHI KUMARMARIAMMAL Vs. STATE OF TAMILNADUBALAJI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have filed these petitions seeking to call for the records in Crime No.374 of 2016 on the file of the first respondent and to quash the same.

(2.) The petitioners are arrayed as A1 and A2 in Crime No.374 of 2016 for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 467, 468, 474, 420 and 120B of IPC. The petitioners herein are none other than the brother and mother of the defacto complainant/ second respondent. The defacto complainant is the elder daughter of one Pichaimani who passed away on 11.10.2015. The said Pichaimani was doing real estate business and he was in possession of number of properties. Due to serious illness, he was admitted in Fortis Malar Hospital, Adyar, Chennai, as inpatient on 27.09.2015. While being so, the defacto complainant learnt that the said Pichaimani had executed settlement deed on 09.10.2015 in favour of his son/ petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.29536 of 2018 and his wife/ petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.14754 of 2018 had signed as witness in the said settlement deed. Hence, the defacto complainant lodged the complaint.

(3.) In the complaint the defacto complainant has stated that her father Pichaimani was diagnosed with cancer during early 2013 and was under treatment and from then he became disoriented and his conscious level subdued. It is also stated that her father was admitted in Fortis Malar Hospital, Adyar, Chennai, as inpatient on 27.09.2015 and he was completely disoriented and on 07.10.2015 he was shifted to Intensive Care Unit and he breathed his last on 11.10.2015. Hence the document alleged to have been executed by her father at his residence cannot be true and the same is nothing but a forged document.