M.Wahajuddin - (1.) THIS case is part-heard. Argument were heard earlier and it was continued as unlisted part-heard today. Further arguments heard. I have looked into the recitals of the first information report. The applicant, besides some others, is said to have forged a will of Rajesh, brother of co-accused Ramesh, in his favour. Others are said to have figured as attesting witnesses etc. The complaint allegation concerning the alleged cheating is directed against Ramesh, who is said to have entered into a contract of sale of land in favour of the complainant Shri Kishan - and also later said to have executed sale-deed receiving the balance. Ramesh is not the applicant in this case. I am simply to consider whether the complaint can proceed against applicant Udai Narain.
(2.) IT would appear that the very will which is said to have been forged was filed in consolidation proceedings. When that is the position, any case concerning forgery of such will and falsification of the document so forth so on can only be filed by the consolidation courts and Section 195, CrPO, would stand as a complete bar to any private complaint in that connection regarding that matter. I have already observed that Ramesh, against whom independently of this will there is allegation of cheating and defrauding the complainant of complainant's money, is not the application in this case. So that aspect would not arise for consideration. The application of applicant Udai Narain is allowed and the entire proceedings against him in criminal case No. 1732 of 1980, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Kanpur, in pursuance of the complaint of Sri Krishna Bajpayee dated 15-7-1980 is quashed., The stay order concerning others is vacated.;