P.Ganesan v. P.Thangavel
Case brief
What is this about?
Revision challenging dismissal of a complaint alleging forgery of a Will. Court directed remittal for fresh action under Cr.P.C. instead of civil court only approach.
What did the court decide?
Criminal revision allowed; order of Magistrate set aside and matter remitted to Magistrate to proceed afresh under Chapter XV and XVI of Cr.P.C.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 11.09.2014
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.SELVAM
Crl.R.C.No.570 of 2014
P.Ganesan … Petitioner
vs. 1.P.Thangavel 2.A.Murugan 3.C.Doraisamy 4.M.Rajaram 5.State rep by The Inspector of Police, Mahalingapuram Police Station, Pollachi. … Respondents
Criminal Revision filed under Section 397 r/w 401 Cr.P.C. praying to set aside the order in C.M.P.No.3104 of 2014 dated 30.05.2014 on the file of learned Judicial Magistrate II, Pollachi to direct the 5th respondent to register a criminal case based on the petitioner's complaint.
For Petitioner : Mr.P.Kumaresan for Mr.R.Nandhakumar For Respondents: Mr.P.Kalimuthu (R1 to R3) Mr.Sukumaran (R4) Mr.Mohammed Riyaz, Govt.Advocate (Crl.side) (R5) O R D E R
This revision challenges the order of Judicial Magistrate II, Pollachi passed in C.M.P.No.3104 of 2014 on 30.05.2014. Thereunder the petitioner has sought a direction under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. The complaint of the petitioner informs that a Will allegedly executed by his father was a forged one and that through such act of forgery the petitioner's right to self acquired properties was sought to be interfered with. The Court below has dismissed the petition merely informing that a Will was to be proved in keeping with Indian Succession Act, 1925 and the relief there regards was to be obtained through civil process. Though the Court below took note of the
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a Magistrate under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. can be directed to register a criminal case for alleged forgery of a Will solely because rights under Indian Succession Act must be tried civilly.
Whether the High Court was justified in setting aside the dismissal of the complaint due to a prima facie case disclosure of forgery.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
P.Ganesan
- respondent
P.Thangavel
- respondent
A.Murugan
- respondent
C.Doraisamy
- respondent
M.Rajaram
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court