1 wp-1468 PGK IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Writ Petition No.1468 of 2003 Mrs.Veena J. Shah & ors. ... ... Petitioners v/s. Rajendra V. Mehta & anr. ... ... Respondents Mr.D.D. Madon, Senior Advocate with Mr.S.A. Sawant for Petitioners. ----- CORAM : SMT.ROSHAN DALVI, J. DATED : 2nd September, 2010 P.C. : 1.The Petitioners have sought to recall the order of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 44 th Court, Andheri, Mumbai, dated 13.6.2002 sending the matter for Police investigation and report under Section 202 of the Criminal Procedure Code and giving power under Section 165 of the Criminal Procedure Code for search and seizure during investigation. The Petitioners have also prayed for calling for the papers in Criminal Case No. 885/S/2002 pending in the Court of the Metropolitan 2 wp-1468 Magistrate, 44 th Court, Andheri, Mumbai. 2.A private criminal complaint has been filed. Cognizance has been taken. Process has been issued. The criminal complaint is inter alia on the ground that certain Will dated 14 th May 1992 and other documents consequent thereupon have been forged by the Petitioners. 3.The Petitioners main case is contained in a letter dated 12 th August 1997 stated to be written by the complainant-Rajendra V. Mehta in respect of the flat which belonged to his deceased parents and addressed to the Secretary of the Society in which the flat is situate. 4.It is contended on behalf of the Petitioners that in terms of the last Will and Testament of the complainant s mother executed on 14 th May 1992, the complainant had addressed a letter to the Society thanking the Society for transferring the flat in the names of the Petitioners herein who are the accused in the criminal complaint. 5.The original letter has been produced before this Court upon the Court s query. The original letter is on a plain A-4 paper. It is not on any letterhead. It is shown to be signed by the complainant as R. Mehta . 3 wp-1468 The admitted signature of the complainant shows that he has signed certain documents as Ravindra V. Mehta . This letter, which is shown as the strongest circumstantial evidence of the execution of the Will purported to have been executed by the mother of the complainant in favour of the Petitioners herein, does not evoke confidence that it should have to be treated as the circumstantial evidence such as to recall the order of the learned Magistrate to quash the criminal proceedings altogether. 6.The criminal investigation must, therefore, continue in accordance with law. The order of the learned Magistrate cannot be faulted. The Petitioners shall produce the original letter stated to have been signed by the complainant containing his signature as R. Mehta to the Police Authorities as and when called for during investigation. 7.Save and except the aforesaid directions, the Petition stands dismissed. 8.In view of the disposal of this Writ Petition, nothing survives in Criminal Application No.84 of 2008 taken out therein and the same is disposed of as infructuous. (SMT.ROSHAN DALVI, J.)