KAILASHCHANDRA SINGHAL Vs. RAMESHWAR DAYAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been preferred under Section 397/401 of Cr.P.C. against the order dated 25.05.2009, passed by JMFC, Gwalior in Criminal Case No.8721/2008 whereby the prayer regarding dismissal of the private complaint made by respondent upon which cognizance has been taken under Sections 420, 464, 467, 468, 471, 474, 198, 205, 209, 120-B of IPC was dismissed.

(2.) Brief facts of the petition are that a forged will of deceased Moolchand @ Mohanlal S/o Late Shri Banshilal Singhal has been produced in the proceedings before the IIIrd ADJ, Shivpuri in Probate Case No.01/1997 (Dharmendra Singhal Vs. Sarvsadharan and Others), in which learned Court below has held that the alleged will is forged one. Thereafter, respondent has filed a private complaint before the JMFC, Gwalior, against the petitioner and other co-accused persons namely Dharmendra Singhal, Om Prakash Agrawal, Anil Kumar Singhal, Babulal, Subhash Chandra, Brij Mohan Maheshwari, Y.S. Tomar and Shailendra Singh Jadon under Sections 420, 464, 467, 468, 471, 474, 198, 205, 209, 120-B of IPC. On the basis of the private complaint, cognizance has been taken against the petitioner and aforesaid co-accused persons under Section 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of IPC. Thereafter, petitioner has preferred an application alleging that the document, which has been alleged to be forged one has been filed before the IIIrd ADJ, Shivpuri, therefore, the jurisdiction for entering the complaint lies with the ADJ, Shivpuri. The Court at Gwalior, has no jurisdiction to take the cognizance and in that application, it was prayed that the complaint be dismissed as not maintainable.

(3.) The application preferred by the petitioner has been rejected by the learned JMFC, holding that after taking cognizance the Court cannot change its decision. Being aggrieved of the same, this revision petition has been preferred.