This criminal original petition has been filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, seeking to quash CC.No.406 of 2010 on the file of Judicial Magistrate No.I, Dindigul.
2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Though the respondent has been served, she has not made her appearance.
3.It is averred in the petition that the petitioners 1 and 2 herein are brothers of one Arockiadoss. The said Arockadoss married one Mariammal. Since, she eloped with another man, they got divorce on 30.04.1998. The respondent complainant is the daughter of the above said Arockiadoss and Mariammal. The above said Arockiadoss was taken care of by his brother viz., the petitioners 1 and 2 herein. Therefore, Arockiadoss executed a Will dated 19.11.2009 bequeathing his properties in favour of the petitioners 1 and 2. Based on the Will, the first petitioner filed partition suit as against the second petitioner in O.S.No.34 of 2010 before Sub Court, Dindigul and the partition suit was decreed on 01.03.2010. On 19.01.2010, the complainant lodged a complaint with the police as against the petitioners with false allegations. The police, after enquiry, closed the petition as it is civil nature. Then, she filed a suit in O.S.No.211 of 2010 before the Sub Court, Dindigul, seeking to declare the Will dated 19.11.2009 executed by Arokiadoss is not valid and not binding and the same is pending. During the pendency of the above suit, she filed a private complaint on 17.05.2010 alleging that the Will has been forged by the petitioners. The respondent complainant has filed the complaint only to wreak vengeance as against the petitioners giving a criminal colour to the civil dispute. The petitioners 3 and 4 are sons of the first petitioner. Therefore, the proceedings in C.C.No.406 of 2010 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Dindigul are to be quashed.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner contents that Mariammal and her children had no connection with Arockiadoss, after leaving him. He was taken care by his brothers viz., 1 and 2 and therefore due to love and affection, he executed the Will dated 19.11.2009. It is further contended that when the respondent filed the suit before the Sub Court, Dindigul about the alleged will, the private complaint with the allegation of forgery and fabrication without any material is not sustainable and therefore the proceedings in C.C.No.406 of 2010 are liable to be quashed.
5.The learned counsel for the petitioner has brought to the notice of this Court the partition suit filed by the first petitioner as against the second petitioner in O.S.No.34 of 2010. It is seen that partition suit has been filed and decreed on the basis of the alleged Will dated 19.11.2009. The respondent complainant also filed a suit on 27.03.2010 in O.S.No.211/2010 as against the petitioners 1 and 2, seeking declaration that the alleged Will dated 19.11.2009 is not valid and binding. The said suit is also pending. During the pendency of the suit, the impugned private complaint has been filed alleging that the petitioners fabricated and forged the Will.
6.This Court also perused the complaint filed by the respondent. To strengthen the allegation made by the complainant, the complainant has not filed any material. As the matter has already been pending before the Civil Court, it is for the Civil Court to decide as to the genuineness of the Will and its binding nature. Therefore, it is purely civil in nature and the present private complaint filed by the respondent as against the petitioners is nothing but an abuse process of the Court. Therefore, the proceedings as against the petitioners in CC.No.406 of 2010 are liable to quashed.
7. In fine, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the proceedings as against the petitioners in C.C.No.406 of 2010 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.1, Dindigul is quashed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
To The Judicial Magistrate No.1, Dindigul..