RAM SARUP Vs. JOG DHIAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) JOG Dhian, respondent in this petition, lodged a complaint under Sections 464, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 506 I.P.C. against the petitioners herein and others before the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jagadhri. He had alleged therein that his maternal grand-father Ram Rakha owned certain properties and died leaving behind his daughter-Kareshani Devi who was his (complainant's) mother. According to the respondent, Kareshani Devi inherited all the properties left by Ram Rakha and she also died on 14.9.1989 leaving behind himself and the other legal heirs. The complainant further alleged that Ist petitioner-Ram Sarup got executed a sale deed dated 8.10.1987 in respect of the some properties standing in the name of Ram Rakha, but Ram Rakha had not executed the sale deed, nor received any consideration. According to the complainant, this sale deed has been fabricated with the help of the document writer and the attesting witnesses. The complainant has also mentioned that on coming to know of the fraud, he and his brothers have filed a civil suit before the Civil Court, Jagadhri in respect of the said properties.

(2.) THE complainant has also alleged that the 2nd petitioner-Tej Pal and others have fabricated a will dated 26.9.1977 alleged to have been executed by Ram Rakha and are claiming ownership to certain properties. According to the complainant, Ram Rakha did not execute the will dated 26.9.1977. The complainant has further alleged that Ram Rakha did not suffer any decree dated 19.9.1984 but on the basis of the judgment and decree, the 2nd petitioner-Tej Pal and others have got the mutation entered in their favour. According to the complainant, Ram Rakha never appeared in the case titled Shiv Kumar v. Ram Rakha before the Sub-Judge, Jagadhri, nor filed a vakalatnama or written statement, nor made any statement before the Court. Therefore, according to the complainant, the judgment and decree dated 19.9.1984 has been obtained fraudulently by showing some other person to be Ram Rakha. According to the complainant, based upon this judgment and decree, the second petitioner-Tej Pal and others claim ownership in the properties. The complainant claims that he and others have filed the suit titled Jagmohan v. Shiv Kumar and others before the Additional Civil Judge, Jagadhri in respect of these properties. According to the complainant both the suits are fixed for evidence of the plaintiffs.

(3.) ON the basis of this complaint, the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jagadhri, after taking into consideration the materials placed before him, summoned the accused to face trial under Sections 465, 467, 468 and 471 I.P.C.