TULARAM MARWADI Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is filed against an order dated 25-8-26. passed by the first Glass Magistrate, Bhandara, in Criminal Case No. 56 of 1926, which was instituted under the following circumstances.

(2.) ONE Vithoba Koshti of Pouni in the Bhandara district died on 16-10-23 leaving behind widows and a posthumous son. Mt Zibli one of the widows presented an application dated 4-2-25 (Exhibit P-1) to the District Court, Bhandara, under the Guardians and Wards Act for the appointment of a guardian for the minor's property. Acting on information elicited in the proceedings thus initiated the District Judge added certain persons who were said to be in possession of the minor's property as parties non-applicants and the present applicant is one of them.

(3.) ON the 18th of September 1925 the guardian submitted his report regarding the minor's Pouni shop and filed along with it a will dated 16-10-23 (Exhibit P-5) handed over to him by the applicant as an authority to him and some others to deal with the minor's estate as trustees appointed by Vithoba. This will remained on the record till 11-12-25 when on the Sub-Inspector's requisition through the District Superintedent of Police it was handed over to him. In the course of the Police investigation it was discovered that the alleged will was forgery. The Sub-Inspector therefore, lodged a complaint under Section 467, of the Indian Penal Code against the applicant and some others in the 1st Class Magistrate's Court on 22-3-26. An objection was taken to the tenability of the prosecution except on a complaint by the Court in which the will was produced. "The objection was summarily overruled by the Magistrate by an order dated 8-6-26 which, however, was set aside by this Court in Criminal Revision No. 272 of 1926 as per order dated 14-7-26 and the Magistrate was directed to dispose of the objection by a proper judicial order according to law. The Magistrate has now passed order dated 25-8-26 overruling the objection. The petitioner moves this Court to set aside and quash the proceedings on the ground that none but the District Court could legally start the prosecution in respect of the offence. The sole question to be considered therefore is whether in the particular circumstances of this case the prosecution could not be started except upon a complaint by the District Court, Bhandara, under Section 476 read with Section 195 (c), Criminal Procedure Code.