- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2377 OF 2009 Kishor Sadashiv Joshi .. Applicant vs State of Maharashtra & ors .. Respondents Mr.M.K.Kocharekar for Applicant Mr.H.J.Dedhia APP for State CORAM: A.S.OKA, J DATED : 15th July, 2009 P.C. 1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the applicant who is the complainant. The applicant filed a private complaint alleging commission of offences under sections 467, 468, 463, 471, 474 read with section 34 of the IPC. The applicant-complainant and accused nos. 1 to 5 and 7 are sons and daughters of late Shankarrao Narayan Joshi. The complaint is filed alleging that along with an application made by the accused to the revenue authorities on 3rd March 1987, a xerox copy of false and fabricated will of late Shankarrao was produced by the accused. Various averments have been made in the complaint showing that the will was forged and fabricated. The complaint was filed in February 2008 on which the learned Judge issued process for offences under sections 467 and 471 of IPC. A Revision application was preferred by the accused in which the order of issue of process has been set aside. - 2 - 2. The learned counsel for the applicant invited my attention to paragraph 5 of the impugned order. He pointed out that the learned Judge has recorded a finding that the offences alleged are extremely serious and the averments made in the complaint make out a case of commission of offence under section 467 of IPC as well as under section 471 of IPC. He pointed out that after recording the said finding, the learned Sessions Judge could not have set aside the order of issue of process only on the ground of delay. He submitted that in view of the averments made in the complaint, the learned Magistrate was justified in issuing the process. 3. I have considered the submissions. In paragraph 23 of the complaint the applicant has alleged that in March 1987 he became aware that the accused had filed an application dated 3rd March,1987 enclosing therewith xerox copy of the alleged fabricated and forged will of the father. A reference has been made in the complaint to various proceedings pending between the parties before the revenue authorities as well as Civil court. The complaint has been lodged on 3rd February 2008 when admittedly the applicant had knowledge about existence of the said will way back in March 1987. In the complaint as well in the verification statement, the applicant has given an explanation for delay. According to him, an attempt was made to lodge a complaint with the police - 3 - authorities and the police authorities have not taken any action. However, no particulars of the alleged complaint have been set out in the application. The verification statement of the applicant itself shows the applicant was aware of the will for a long time and the applicant was prosecuting various litigations before the revenue authorities and in civil court. In the verification, it is stated that on the basis of the will the accused had filed a civil suit in the year 1999 in which the said bogus will has been produced. 4. Considering the gross delay in lodging the complaint, the learned Sessions Judge was justified in interfering with the order of issue of process. The jurisdiction of this Court under section 482 of the Code of the Criminal Procedure, 1973 is to be exercised sparingly and in very rare cases. This is not a case for interference. Application is rejected. 5. It is, however, made clear that nothing stated in the impugned order of the Sessions court as well as this court shall not be construed as any adjudication on the genuineness, legality and validity of the disputed will and the concerned authorities and the civil court are free to decide the said issue on its own merits. A.S.Oka, J - 4 - - 5 -