1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 01.02.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH Criminal Original Petition (MD)No.1230 of 2011 1.R.Anbukkarasan 2.R.Seenivasan ... Petitioners Vs. The State represented by The Sub Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Virudhunagar District Crime No.6 of 2010 ... Respondent PRAYER: This Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to direct the Sub Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, virudhunagar District to consider the request of the petitioners with regard to report to be obtained from the expert of the Central Finger Print Bureau made through their representation dated 18.01.2011 in connection with the case in Crime No.6 of 2010 pending on the file of the respondent. For Petitioner :Mr.R.Anand For Respondents :Mr.L.Murugan, Govt. Advocate( Crl. Side) O R D E R This petition has been filed seeking for an issuance of a direction to the respondent police to send the document for getting a comparison report and to ascertain the sanctity of signature as well as thumb impression found available in the will executed by the father Mr.Raju Reddiar by sending them to the Secretary, Central Finger Print Bureau, East Block-7, R.K.Puram, New Delhi at the earliest and to gather further evidence for filing the charge sheet. 2.Heard Mr.R.Anand, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.L.Murugan, learned Government Advocate (criminal side) appearing for the State. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit in his argument that the petitioners are ranked as A1 and A2 in a case registered in crime No.6 of 2010 on the file of the respondent police and the investigation is offing. He would further submit in his argument that the nature of investigation would require the comparison of signature, handwriting and the finger print made in the Will been done for the purpose of adjudicating the claim of parties with perfection and it require that the relevant records or documents may be sent to the Central Finger Print Bureau made as per their representation dated 18.01.2011 in connection with the case in crime No.6 of 2010 on the file of the respondent police. 4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would also submit that the absence of such comparison in the course of investigation will certainly bring the disrepute and if the said documents compared with https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 such signatures, thumb impressions and handwriting and the report has been obtained, the investigation will be completed easily and therefore, there may not be any further confusion in the investigation and hence, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the representation dated 18.11.2011 may be directed to be considered by the respondent and thereafter to complete the investigation. He would request the Court to order the petition as sought for. 5.The learned Government Advocate (criminal side) would submit in his arguments that the nature of crime alleged in the complaint and in the investigation would require the comparison of signatures, thumb impressions and handwriting. If for any reasons, this Court directs the respondent police to proceed with the comparison of Central Finger Print Bureau at R.K.Puram, New Delhi and thereafter to complete the investigation, the State is ready to obey the direction of this Court. 6.I have paid much consideration to the arguments advanced on either side. 7.The case has been registered on the complaint given by the defacto complainant and was registered for the offence under Sections 467, 471, 420 and 406 I.P.C. and the investigation is now pending with the respondent police. The main crux of the case would be whether the Will dated 19.03.2004, registered on 21.03.2004 is a true and genuine or a forged one as contended by the defacto complainant. 8.The petitioners, who are the accused 1 and 2 seeking for a direction to send the Will for being compared with other documents executed by the said executant and also with the thumb impression registered and kept by the Sub-Registrar of Sattur during 21.03.2004 and to get a report from the said experts. Therefore, this Court has no impediment to pass such an order as sought for in the representation dated 18.01.2011 as submitted before the respondent police by the petitioner. 9.With the aforesaid direction, this criminal original petition is ordered accordingly. sd/- Assistant Registrar (P&A) /TRUe Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar (C.S) To 1. The Sub Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Virudhunagar District 2. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. Crl.O.P.(MD) No.1230 of 2011 01.02.2011 arul RJ/9.2.11 2p/3c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/