- (1.) Delay condoned.
(2.) Leave granted.
(3.) The Appellants-Dr. (Mrs.) Neena V. Patel, and her son Gautam V. Patel, are the original complainants who filed complaint case under Sections 120-B, 420, 465, 466, 467, 468, 471, 472, 473, 474 and 477 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, against present Respondent Nos. 1 to 5. Respondent No. 1 is the mother of Appellant No. 1 and Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 are her brother and sisters. It is alleged in the said complaint that the father of the Appellant No. 1, namely, Late Shri Parmanandbhai Patel had expressed his desire that Appellant No. 1 and another brother-Siddharth Kumar, should remain in joint control of his business and look after the business after his death and, accordingly, a Will was executed by said Parmanandbhai Patel in the year 1986, followed by a Codicil, under which substantial properties were bequeathed in favour of Appellant No. 1 and said Siddharth Kumar. It is further alleged that her father suffered a brain stroke in the year 1994 and his physical condition made him completely dependent upon the support from his family. It is alleged that on 23.12.1991, another Will was executed by her father, which was a Registered Will under which the main beneficiaries of the assets of the father were stated to be Respondent No. 1 and other family members.;