IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 10TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 21ST MAGHA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 346 of 2011() ---------------------------------- CRIME NO.7/2011 OF THRIKKAKARA POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT --------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED 1 TO 8 ------------------------------------------------- 1. THANKAMMA VARGHESE, AGED 85 YEARS, W/O.LATE E.M.VARGHESE, KOCHUMANAPPURATH VEEDU, EEZHAKKADAVU P.O., CHERUKOL, MAVELIKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 2. K.V.PHILIP @ BABU, AGED 55 YEARS, S/O.LATE E.M.VARGHESE, KOCHUMANAPPURATH VEEDU, EEZHAKKADAVU P.O., CHERUKOL, MAVELIKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 3. K.V.JOSE @ BIJI, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.LATE E.M.VARGHESE, KOCHUMANAPPURATH VEEDU, EEZHAKKADAVU P.O., CHERUKOL, MAVELIKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 4. RAJAMMA VARGHESE, AGED 54 YEARS, W/O.P.C.VARGHESE, VINOD BHAVAN, PALLICKAL, ELIPPAKULAM P.O., OCHIRA, CHERUKOL, MAVELIKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 5. P.C.VARGHESE, AGED 60 YEARS, VINOD BHAVAN, PALLICKAL, ELIPPAKULAM P.O., OCHIRA, CHERUKOL, MAVELIKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 6. N.S.MOHANDAS, ADVOCATE, AGED 39 YEARS, S/O.LATE M.G.S.MENON, PAULIN BUILDING, T.D.ROAD, ERNAKULAM-11. 7. V.ANEESH, ADVOCATE, AGED 28 YEARS, S/O.VISWANATHA KURUP, PAULIN BUILDING, T.D.ROAD, ERNAKULAM-11. 8. SUMSON T.S., ADVOCATE, AGED 31 YEARS, S/O.T.V.SUNNY, PAULIN BUILDING, T.D.ROAD, ERNAKULAM-11. BY ADV. SRI.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN sts CRL.M.C.NO.346/2011 RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, THRIKKAKARA POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. ANJALIN MATHEW @ ANJU MATHEW, AGED 53 YEARS, W/O.LATE K.V.MATHEW, BATHEL VEEDU, PADAMUGHAL, VAZHAKKALA VILLAGE, THRIKKAKARA P.O., ERNAKULAM-682 021. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.K.PUSHPALATHA R2 BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: sts THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.346 of 2011 --------------------------------------- Dated this 10th day of February, 2011 ORDER Petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 8 in Crime No.7 of 2011 of the Thrikkakara Police Station for offences punishable under Secs.420, 465, 468, 471 and 120B of the Penal Code. That case was registered on a complaint filed by the second respondent before the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Aluva and forwarded to the police for investigation under Sec.156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Case is that petitioners cheated the second respondent who is the daughter-in-law of the first petitioner by forging an unregistered Will dated 15.06.2009 regarding 5 cents belonging to the husband of second respondent. The Will is purported to have been executed by the deceased husband of second respondent. Proceedings are sought to be quashed on the strength of a settlement parties have reached. I have heard learned counsel for petitioners and learned Public Prosecutor. 2. Annexure-A1 is the complaint preferred by the second respondent before learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Aluva. Annexure-A3 is the FIR registered on the complaint Crl.M.C.No.346 of 2011 -: 2 :- forwarded to the police for investigation. Annexure-A4 is the affidavit sworn by the second respondent before the notary public where it is stated that elder members of the family intervened in the dispute and that the dispute has been settled amicably out of Court. The settlement is that petitioners will not make any claim in future in the property involved on the strength of impugned Will. It is stated that petitioners further agreed that they would not disturb second respondent's possession and enjoyment of the property which is the subject matter of the disputed Will and that petitioners agreed that they would destroy the agreement made with the tenants and inform them that the property absolutely belonged to the second respondent. In the light of the settlement second respondent does not want to proceed with the matter further. 3. The fact of settlement is confirmed by the learned counsel for second respondent and petitioners. It is also submitted before me by counsel for petitioners and second respondent that the impugned unregistered Will is not in existence now and that petitioners will not make any claim over the property involved based on the impugned Will which I am told, is not in existence. The submissions are recorded. Similar is the statement given by the second respondent in Annexure-A4, affidavit. Crl.M.C.No.346 of 2011 -: 3 :- 4. Since basically it is a dispute over the property and that has been settled between the parties due to the intervention of elders in the family, I am not inclined to think that the proceedings must proceed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the case still is in the crime stage. Having regard to the circumstances stated I am inclined to allow the petition. Resultantly, recording submission of learned counsel for petitioners and second respondent that the impugned unregistered Will is no more in existence and that petitioners will not make any claim over the property on the strength of the said Will or dispute the title of the second respondent over the said property this petition is allowed. Annexure-A3, FIR in Crime No.7 of 2011 of Thrikkakara Police Station and proceeding taken pursuant thereto against petitioners will stand quashed. (THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-