NANDKISHOR LAXMINARAYAN MUNDHADA Vs. DWARKADAS MURLIDHAR MUNDHADA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code for quashing the criminal complaint as well as F. I. R. registered by the police against the present applicants.

(2.) One Deokaran left behind him his wife Bhagirathabai and two sons Laxminarayan and Murlidhar. Deokaran died in the year 1979 and before he died he had executed a will whereby he bequeathed his property in favour of his wife Bhagirathibai. It is alleged that Bhagirathibai died in the year 1994 leaving behind her two sons i.e. Laxminarayan and Murlidhar. It is alleged further that before she died she had executed a will on 17.01.1994 whereby she bequeathed the entire property in favour of her grand son Nandkishor son of Laxminarayan. Nandkishor, therefore, instituted a suit against his uncle Murlidhar, Murlidhar's son and the daughters of Bhagirathibai. Even Nandkishor's father Laxminarayan was also party to the suit bearing Civil Suit No. 48 of 1995. In the said civil suit Nandkishor claimed that the property was bequeathed by Deokaran to Bhagirathibai and Bhagirathibai had bequeathed the entire property which she got by will in favour of plaintiff Nandkishor. Defendants in that suit i. e. the present respondent contested the suit and challenged both the wills. Similarly the present respondent Dwarkadas instituted a Criminal Complaint against Nandkishor his father and his brothers and those who had scribed and attested the wills. In the said criminal complaint he alleged that the wills have been fabricated and they are forged. It was also alleged that Deokaran and Bhagirathibai never executed any kind of will at all. The learned Judicial Magistrate after this criminal complaint was filed under Section 420, 468, 465 and 34 of Indian Penal Code, forwarded the said complaint to the police station under Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code. Upon receipt of the said complaint from the Judicial Magistrate First Class police station Mehkar registered an offence against the present applicants. It is this criminal complaint and the F. I. R. registered on the basis of the said criminal complaint, which are sought to be quashed.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the applicants and the learned counsel for the respondent.