IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 14TH AUGUST 2009 / 23RD SRAVANA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 2521 of 2006() ------------------------- CC.731/1997 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, ALUVA .................... PETITIONERS: ACCUSED NO.2 AND 3 1. KUNJU MUHAMMED, S/O. MAKKAR, MAROTTICKAL VEEDU, EDATHALA, ALUVA EAST VILLAGE. 2. RAJAPPAN @ ERAVI NARAYANAN KARTHAVU EDATHALA KARA, ALUVA EAST VILLAGE. 3. RAVEENDRAN, S/O. RAGHAVAN, MALANATTIL VEETTIL, KAKKANADUTHARA KARA, ALUVA EAST VILLAGE. 4. MURALI, S/O. NARAYANA MENON, KAKKATTUVEETTIL, KAKKANADUTHARA KARA, KANAYANNUR TALUK, CHERANELLOOR VILLAGE. 5. VIJAYAN, S/O. AYYAPPAN, KANNAMTHANAM VEEDU, KEEZHUMADU KARA, ALUVA EAST VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.DINESH MATHEW J.MURIKAN SRI.P.V.BALAKRISHNAN RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANTS: --------------------------- 1. DR. R. PREMNATH, DENTAL SURGEON, KEYPE ROAD, RAMAVARMAPURAM, NAGARKOVIL. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. ADV. SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR FOR R1 SRI.P.SURESH FOR R1 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.B.JAYASURYA -R2 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON CRL.M.A.NO.4578/06 IN CRL.M.C.NO.2521/06 DISMISSED 14.8.09 Sd/- (C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------- CRL. M.C. NO.2521 OF 2006 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of August, 2009 O R D E R Accused Nos. 2 and 3 and 5 to 7 in C.C.No.731/97 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court I, Aluva are the petitioners herein. This Crl.M.C has been filed with prayer to quash Annexure A complaint pending against them before that court. When the matter was taken up for hearing, the counsel for the petitioners brought to my notice, Annexure A6 order of this Court whereby the proceedings as against accused Nos. 1 and 8 in the said C.C were quashed as per a common order in Crl.M.C Nos.3023/99 and 1485/98. 2. The respondent herein, filed a private complaint against eight accused persons including the petitioners herein and the petitioners in Crl.M.C covered by Annexure A6. They were sought to be indicted under Section 463 of the I.P.C. The crux of allegations against them is that they have acted in collusion to defeat the rights of the complainant and for that behalf they had created some false documents. In Annexure A6 judgment, this court has carefully considered the sustainability or otherwise Crl.M.C.No.2521 of 2006 2 of the charge under Section 463 of the I.P.C against the petitioners therein who were accused Nos.1 and 8 in C.C.No.731/97. After considering the position of law with respect to the facts obtained in this case, it was held by Annexure A6 as hereunder:- 7. On this aspect, the law appears to be well settled. The mere fact that an incorrect or false statement is made in a document, does not render the document a false document under Section 464 I.P.C. Reliance is placed in the decisions reported in A.K.Khosla v. T.S.Venkatesan (1992 Crl.LJ 1448) and Mathew v. George (1989 (1) KLT 470). It is not necessary to consider the changes brought about in Section 463 and 464 I.P.C by Section 91 of the Information Technology Act as the alleged offence in the instant case has been committed prior to the amendment. It is unnecessary to advert to the decision of the Calcutta High Court as the question has been dealt with clearly and specifically by a single bench of this court in Mathew's case. In paragraph 7 of that decision the law is stated very clearly that “ In order to constitute a false document as per the first division (under Section 464) the document must be purported to have been signed, made or sealed by a person who did not in fact do it. The mere fact that a document contains some false recitals or untrue statement would not make it a false document within the meaning of Section (Section 464). In paragraph 8, after adverting to the relevant earlier decisions on the point, it is declared that “these decisions lend support to the Crl.M.C.No.2521 of 2006 3 position that by merely stating something falsely in a document one does not create a false document as envisaged under Section 464 I.P.C”. 8. That precisely is the position in this case. Accused 3 to 8 are alleged to have executed documents which incorrectly/falsely claim that they had rights over the property in question when they really had none in the light of pre 1963 document executed by A3 in favour of the complainant. The allegations of commission of forgery raised against accused 1 and 8, petitioners herein, cannot in these circumstances, succeed. The allegations are such that even if they were accepted in toto, no successful prosecution of the petitioners/accused 1 and 8 is possible. In these circumstances, I am satisfied that this is a fit case where the extra ordinary inherent jurisdiction available to this court under Section 482 Cr.P.C can ought to be invoked in favour of the petitioners to prematurely terminate the prosecution against them.. 3. I have heard the petitioners, counsel for the respondent and also the learned public prosecutor. Counsel for the respondent submitted that he has already approached the competent civil court to redress the grievances which are the subject matter in these proceedings. Since the subject matter also constitute a civil wrong and the parties have already approached a competent civil court, it will not be in the interest of justice to allow these Crl.M.C.No.2521 of 2006 4 proceedings to continue especially in view of Annexure A6 judgment. In the circumstances, I ween that I need not consider the sustainability or otherwise of the charges under Section 463 of the I.P.C against the petitioners herein. Therefore, without prejudice to the rights of the parties, the prosecution against accused Nos.2 and 3 and 5 to 7 in C.C.No.731/97 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court I, Aluva is hereby quashed. The above Crl.M.C is accordingly allowed. (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) spc C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. CRL. M.C. NO. O R D E R 3rd June, 2009