IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO. 1079 OF 2001 WRIT PETITION NO. 1079 OF 2001 WRIT PETITION NO. 1079 OF 2001 Rajaram Chandru Pavlekar ... Petitioner (Orig.Complainant) Vs. Siddu Krishna Kaikwadi (Chavan) &Ors. ... Respondents (Orig. accused) Mr. Umesh Mankapure for R.V.More for the petitioner Ms. M.M.Deshmukh, P.P. for the State. CORAM CORAM CORAM: S.K.SHAH,J. S.K.SHAH,J. S.K.SHAH,J. DATE DATE DATE : 12th June,2006. 12th June,2006. 12th June,2006. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner. I have gone through the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Karad, issuing process undr section 420 of I.P.C. and the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Satara, dismissing the complaint as also the complaint. 2. Looking to the allegations made in the complaint, the matter pertains to the execution of the Will bythe deceased person. The allegation is that the deceased was forced to sign the Will with a view to deprive the complainant’s son who was adopted bythe deceased. The Will stands challenged in the Civil Court. The execution of the Will by the deceased person is not in dispute. What is in dispute is the manner in which signature was obtained will be considered by the Civil Court. 3. Under the circumstances, I do not find any illegality and impropriety in the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Satara, and consequently, I do not find any merit in this Petition. The Writ Petition is, therefore, dismissed. --- (S.K.SHAH,J.) (S.K.SHAH,J.) (S.K.SHAH,J.)