JETTI VENKATRAYUDU Vs. EDARA VENKATA SUBBIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) One Edara Venkata Subbaiah, the sole respondent herein, filed a complaint against three accused alleging that they committed the offences of forgery etc., by fabricating a photograph and presented the same before the Sub Registrar as a document in support of their evidence in certain proceedings. The complaint was taken on file and the case concerned is now pending as C.C. No. 141 of 1964 on the file of the Additional Munsif-Magistrate, Tenali. The three accused in that case filed this petition praying for the stay of all further proceedings in C.C. No. 141 of 1964 pending disposal of O.S. No. 95 of 1963 on the file of the Sub Court, Tenali.

(2.) For purposes of convenience, I am referring to the various parties by their denomination in C.C. No. 141 of 1964 hereafter in this order.

(3.) The relevant facts are as follows. Venkayamma was the mother of the complainant. A-3 is the sister of Venkayamma and also the mother of A-2 who is the wife of A-1. When Venkayamma was alive, the accused got registered at the house of A-1 and A-2 (hereinafter called for convenience the house of the accused) a will purporting to have been executed on 5-2-1963 by Venkayamma. Under this will, there is benefit to A-1 and A-2. Subsequently, Venkayamma died. After her death, her son i.e., the complainant presented another will for registration before the Sub Registrar, Tenali purporting to have been executed by Venkayamma on 28-2-1963 at the complainants house. That will contained a recital that the testator cancelled the earlier will dated 5-2-1963 and bequeathed her property to the children of the complainant. The Sub Registrar registered will case No. 1 of 1963 and conducted enquiry regarding the will dated 28-2-1963. In that enquiry, A-2 filed objections contending that the will dated 28-2-1963 could not be true as Venkayamma did not leave the house of A-1 and A-2 at any time after executing the will dated 5-2-1963 till she died in that same house. To probablise that Venkayamma had died in the house of A-1 and A-2, A-2 contended that, soon after the death of Venkayamma, a photo of her corpse was taken at the house of A-1 and A-2 and produced as such, a photograph which was marked as Ex. B-1 by the Sub Registrar in will Case No. 1 of 1963. The complainant contended that the photograph was not genuine i.e., what appears in it did not represent the true state of facts. Later on, he filed C.C. No. 141 of 1964 alleging that the three accused committed offence in regard to the photograph (Ex. B-1) on the basis of the following facts. In that case, he also filed and marked in his evidence as Ex. A-1 a photograph which had been taken on the occasion of his marriage in the year 1937, in which Venkayamma was sitting.