Bangalore District Court
The State Rep. By vs A-1 Smt. Malathi Iyer on 4 April, 2018
IN THE COURT OF VI ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN
MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU
PRESENT : K.G. CHINTHA, B.Sc., LL.B.
VI ADDL. C.M.M., BENGALURU.
Dated this the 4th day of April 2018
C.C.No.1133/2014
Complainant : The State rep. by
PSI of Mico Layout PS
Bengaluru.
Vs
Accused : A-1 Smt. Malathi Iyer
W/o S. Ramaswamy
Aged about 71 Yrs
R/at No.323/328/3,
3rd Cross, Sarvabhoumanagar,
B.G.Road, Bengaluru.
A-2 Smt. Vasantha
W/o Late Suresh
Aged about 51 Yrs
r/at No.91/3, Nethaji Road,
1st Cross, 1st Block,
Thyagarajnagar, Bengaluru.
Date of offence : Subsequent to 2009
Offence : U/s. 468, 471, 420, 120(b) and
201 r/w 34 of IPC
2 CC.No.1133/2014
Plea : Accused pleaded not guilty
Final order : Accused Nos.1 and 2 are
acquitted
Date of Order : 4-4-2018.
** ** **
JUDGMENT
The Police Sub Inspector of Adugodi Police Station has presented this charge sheet against the accused Nos.1 and 2 for the offences punishable U/s.468, 471, 420, 120(b) and 201 r/w 34 of IPC.
2. It is the case of prosecution that Ramaswamy is the owner of the property bearing house No.326/328-2, 2nd MainRoad, 3rd Cross, Sarvabhouma Nagar, Bannerghatta Road, Bengaluru. The accused No.1 being the divorced wife of the said Ramaswamy had got created a fraudulent and forged Will of late Ramaswamy in collusion with accused No.2 and by making use of the said forged will has been collecting money from the tenants of the said house illegally 3 CC.No.1133/2014 stating that accused No.1 is the owner of the said property and that she has right over the same and has destroyed the evidence regarding fraudulent and forged will and cheated the complainant and thereby accused committed the aforesaid offences.
3. On the basis of the complaint, FIR has been registered by Mico Layout Police station in Cr.No.300/2012 for the offences punishable U/s. 468, 471, 420, 120(b) and 201 r/w 34 of IPC. After investigation police have charge sheeted the accused for the aforesaid offences.
4. Accused Nos.1 and 2 are on bail.
5. Copy of the charge sheet is furnished as contemplated U/s.207 of Cr.P.C. Charge framed. Accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
6. CW.1 is examined as PW-1 and got marked Ex.P-1. 4 CC.No.1133/2014
7. Since there is no incriminating evidence against the accused, statement U/s.313 of Cr.P.C is dispensed with.
8. Heard the arguments of learned Sr.APP and learned counsel for the accused.
9. The points that arise for my consideration are as follows:-
1) Whether the prosecution proves the guilt of accused Nos.1 and 2 for the offences punishable U/s. 468, 471, 420, 120(b) and 201 r/w 34 of IPC?
2) What Order?
10. My findings on the above points are as follows:-
Point No.1: In the Negative Point No.2: As per final Order for the following:-
REASONS
11. Point No.1:- CW.1 the complainant is examined as PW.1. She has deposed that accused No.1 is her mother. 5 CC.No.1133/2014 Accused No.2 is her mother's friend. Accused have not cheated her. She had lodged complaint against the accused as there was some misunderstanding between them. She does not know the contents of the complaint Ex.P-1. She was treated as hostile by the prosecution and she denied all the suggestions put to her. It was suggested to her that accused No.1 had got created a Will of her father and by using forged Will collected the rents illegally from the tenants and has cheated the complainant and she denies the said suggestion. It is stated by PW-1 that she has compromised the matter with the accused and that she would like to with draw the complaint.
12. The allegations in the complaint Ex.P-1 is that accused No.1 had obtained a decree of divorce in MC No.262/1987 as against S. Ramaswamy, her husband. The property bearing No.326/328-2 Khata No.584/1 situated at 3rd Cross, Bannerghatta Main Road Sarvabhoumanagar, Bengaluru belongs to her father S. Ramaswamy. A portion 6 CC.No.1133/2014 of the property was given to the accused No.1 for her stay. Her father died in the year 2009. The complainant is a resident of USA. When she visited India during 2010 February she noticed certain anomalies with her mother's acquaintances and life style. Accused No.1 had got created a fraudulent and forged Will of her father S. Ramaswamy. Her father had no intention to execute any Will in favour of accused No.1. His intention was that his children should inherit the property. Hence she has sought for taking action against the accused and for seizure of the fabricated Will and to send the same to handwriting expert. Further accused No.1 has been collecting rent from the tenants by making use of the forged Will. Though the complainant has alleged that accused No.1 has created fraudulent and forged Will of her father in conspiracy with accused No.2 and cheated the complainant and her brother, she has not supported the prosecution case in view of the compromise between them. In view of the hostile evidence and 7 CC.No.1133/2014 compromise the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of accused. Accordingly I answer point No.1 in the Negative.
13. Point No.2: In view of the finding on point No.1, I proceed to pass the following:-
ORDER Acting U/s.248(1) of Cr.P.C accused Nos.1 and 2 are acquitted of the offences punishable U/s.468, 471, 420, 120(b) and 201 r/w 34 of IPC. The bail bonds of the accused Nos.1 and 2 stands cancelled.
(Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed thereof, corrected and then pronounced by me in the open court this the 4th day of April 2018).
(K.G. CHINTHA) VI Addl.C.M.M. Bengaluru city. Annexure
1. Witnesses examined for the prosecution:
CW-1 PW-1 Subhashri Balakumar. 8 CC.No.1133/2014
2.Documents marked on behalf of the prosecution:
Ex.P-1 Complaint.
3. Material objects:
Nil.
VI ACMM., Bengaluru.9 CC.No.1133/2014
, ORDER Acting U/s.248(1) of Cr.P.C accused Nos.1 and 2 are acquitted of the offences punishable U/s.468, 471, 420, 120(b) and 201 r/w 34 of IPC. The bail bonds of the accused Nos.1 and 2 stands cancelled.
(Vide Separate Order) VI ACMM., Bengaluru.10 CC.No.1133/2014
11 CC.No.1133/2014