The revision petitioner herein preferred a complaint before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Muvattupuzha against the respondents herein alleging offence under Section 465, 468, 471 and 420 r/w.34 IPC. The said complaint was forwarded to the police for investigation under Section 156(3) Cr.PC. The first respondent herein is the uncle of the complainant. The dispute is concerning some property left by the grand father Velayudhan. The first accused is one among the children of deceased Velayudhan. The 4th accused is the wife of the first accused, the 2nd accused is the son of the first accused and the 3rd accused is the wife of the second accused.
2. The allegation in the complaint filed in the court below is that claiming exclusive title over some property left by the grand father Velayudhan, the first accused made assignment of some property in favour of his son, the first accused, by way of a settlement deed. It is alleged that by making such false assignment claiming right over the property, the first accused in fact cheated the other co- owners including the complainant.
3. After investigation the police filed a final report, referring the claim as one of civil nature. The revision petitioner herein filed objection to the said refer report and made request for cognizance. After hearing the petitioner in detail, the learned Magistrate accepted the refer charge sheet and closed the matter. This revision is against the said order.
4. On hearing the learned counsel and on a perusal of the case records including the allegations and averments in the complaint, I find that this case does not involve any offence. If at all the first accused had made assignment of some property wherein the complainant has also a share as co-owner, claiming exclusive title, it will not bind the de facto complainant. If at all anybody is cheated, the only person cheated must be the assignee, who is the second accused. It is not known what is the role of accused Nos.3 and 4. If the first accused in fact made such an assignment in favour of his son claiming exclusive right over a property, the other co-owners cannot be heard to complain that they are cheated because such an assignment will not affect the rights of the other co-owners, and such an assignment will not affect their share or their interest. In short, the said assignment will not in any manner bind the de facto complainant. In such a situation it cannot at all be said that the others were cheated by the first accused. The only person who can complain of cheating is the person who got the assignment by way of settlement deed, made by the first accused. That person is in fact, the second accused arraigned in the complaint. If at all the complainant has any grievance, it must be only of a civil nature, and he will have to go to the civil court for appropriate relief including partition. I find that the refer charge sheet submitted by the police was rightly accepted by the trial court.
In the result, this revision petition is dismissed in limine, without prejudice to the rights of the revision petitioner to seek appropriate civil remedies.
Sd/-
P. UBAID, (Judge)
Kvs/-
-// true copy //-
PA TO JUDGE.