SHIVKANT CHOUBEY Vs. CHHOTIBAI ALIAS BADIBAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order shall also govern disposal of Misc. Cri. Case No. 1749 of 1986, Arunodya Choubey and two others v. Shivkant Choubey and one another which arises out of the same order and, therefore, involves common questions of law and facts.

(2.) THESE two cases arise out of the order dated 31st March, 1986 passed by the Sessions Judge, Bhopal in Criminal Revision No. 11 of 1986, Smt. Chhotibai and three others v. Shivkant Choubey and Anr. . The revision before the learned Sessions Judge was directed against the order dated 13-1-1986 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Class I, Bhopal in Regular Trial No. 11 of 1986 whereby a complaint filed by Shivkant Choubey and Puraskar Choubey against Smt. Chhotibai and others was registered under Sections 467 and 468, Indian Penal Code and process issued. The learned Sessions Judge found no ground for registering complaint against Smt. Chhotibai and quashed the same. He, however, found sufficient justification for continuing proceedings against others. The present criminal revision is directed against the aforesaid order in so far as it exonerates Smt. Chhotibai. The Misc. Cri. Case has been filed by others against whom proceedings have been continued.

(3.) ONE Shri Ramgulam Choubey had filed a civil suit in the Court of III Civil Judge, Class II, Khurai (Civil Suit No. 36-A/80) during his life time. He unfortunately died on 1-8-1983 and, therefore, non-applicant Smt. Chhotibai, through her lawyer filed an application claiming to be the sole legal representative of said Shri Ramgulam Choubey on the basis of a Will alleged to have been executed by Shri Choubey on 14-4-1983. A photo copy of the Will was also filed before the learned Civil Judge. A perusal of the complaint indicates that the revision petitioner learnt about this Will which, according to them, was forged and fabricated and lodged a report to the C. ID. , Bhopal on 14-12-1983. They were, however, advised to file a complaint. They, therefore, filed a complaint on 29-12-1983 against Smt. Chhotibai and three others alleging offences under Sections 420/464/465/467/471/474 read with Section 120-B, Indian Penal Code. The learned Magistrate registered this complaint and directed an enquiry into the allegation under Section 202, Criminal Procedure Code. Thereafter, by order dated 13-1-1986, the learned Magistrate found sufficient reason for registering complaint under Sections 467 and 468, Indian Penal Code. He accordingly issued process to the accused persons for their appearance in the Court on 19-2-1986. The order dated 13-1-1986 was challenged by Smt. Chhotibai and others in revision before the learned Sessions Judge as illegal and without jurisdiction. The learned Sessions Judge went through the evidence on record and came to the conclusion that it does not connect Smt. Chhotibai with the offence in any manner. According to him, the mere fact that her Advocate filed a photo-copy of the Will in the Court is not sufficient to make her liable for offences under Sections 467 and 468, Indian Penal Code. The learned Sessions Judge was also of the opinion that even if Smt. Chhotibai was possessed of the Will and was one of the beneficiaries, no inference of her being a co-conspirator to its alleged forging can legitimately be drawn. That is how proceedings against non-applicant Smt. Chhotibai were quashed. It is this part of the order, which is subject matter of the present criminal revision. The unsuccessful revision petitioners also feel aggrieved by this order and challenge the same in the present Misc. Criminal Case.