CRR No.2302 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** CRR No.2302 of 2010 Date of decision : 17.12.2010 Smt. Rita Rishi .........Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab and others .......Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S.BEDI : Present:- Mr.Saurabh Arora, Advocate, for the petitioner ---- M.M.S.BEDI, J (ORAL) : The petitioner-complainant had filed a complaint against private respondents alleging that they had prepared a fake Will of Bhagwanti, who is wife of the brother of the petitioner and got mutation No.1684 entered in the revenue record. The grievance of the petitioner was that the names of the petitioner-complainant and his sister had been wrongly excluded from the Will and the mutation. Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Fatehgarh Sahib had dismissed the complaint and discharged the respondent holding that no civil Court has given finding that the Will on the basis of which mutation was entered, was forged and fabricated document and that there was no evidence produced by the petitioner-complainant on the record which could lead the Court to believe that it was on account of non-disclosure or on account of any other overt act of the respondent that revenue official mentioned the name of Bhagwanti in CRR No.2302 of 2010 -2- the pedegree table. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that prima facie the offences under Sections 420, 467 and 471 IPC are made out against the respondents but they have been wrongly discharged. I have heared learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the facts and circumstances of this case. The main grievance of the petitioner was that his civil rights were defeated on the basis of a Will propounded by the private respondents. The mutation entry which was made on the basis of the Will had the effect to defeat the rights of the complainant. However, the suit filed by the petitioner seeking a declaration that he is owner of 1/4th share of the property left by Smt.Bhagwanti, his suit has been decreed by the civil Court, the Appellate Court and upheld by this Court in RSA. In view of the grievance of the petitioner that attempt had been made to cheat him and to defeat his civil rights, does not exist any more. Besides this, the Will propounded by respondents has not been believed by the Courts but no finding has been given by the civil Courts that the said Will having been fabricated or fraudulently made constitutiung an offence under Section 463 IPC punishable under Section 465 or 467 IPC. No ground is made out for interference in the well reasoned order of the trial Court. Dismissed. (M.M.S.BEDI) JUDGE 17th Dec., 2010 akm