Rekha Mittal, J. - (1.) THE present petition lays challenge to orders dated 4.7.2011 and dated 30.1.2013 passed by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ludhiana and Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana whereby the complaint filed by the petitioner for offence under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code (in short "IPC") has been dismissed by the trial court and the order passed by the trial court has been affirmed in revision.
(2.) PARAMJIT Singh petitioner initiated criminal proceedings on the allegations that Smt. Bhagwan Kaur wife of Gurbax Singh was the grand mother of the complainant. Prithipal Singh was the son and Parkash Kaur, Kanwaljeet Kaur and Neelampal Kaur were the daughters of Smt. Bhagwan Kaur. On the death of Bhagwan Kaur, estate devolved upon her class -I heirs on the basis of natural succession. Prithipal Singh, father of the petitioner transferred his share, inherited from Bhagwan Kaur, in favour of Gurkirat Singh and Gurjot Singh, sons of the complainant. Smt. Neelampal Kaur, sister of father of the complainant started suffering from mental illness and was unable to think rationally and look after her interests. Col. Nirbhai Singh Pandher (respondent No. 2), husband of Kanwaljit Kaur poisoned Parkash Kaur (Bua of the petitioner)(respondent No. 5) against the complainant. Parkash Kaur submitted an application to the Deputy Commissioner, Ludhiana on 19.12.2004 regarding mental illness of Neelampal Kaur. It is further averred that Col. Nirbhai Singh Pandher and other accused in connivance with each other poisoned Deepinder Kaur Bajwa (respondent No. 4) and got executed a general power of attorney from Neelampal Kaur in the name of Deepinder Kaur Bajwa and got it registered vide Wasika No. 3830 dated 29.3.2005 at Ludhiana. On the basis of said power of attorney, sale deed dated 11.10.2006 was executed by Deepinder Kaur Bajwa daughter of Neelampal Kaur in favour of Ishpreet Singh son of Nirbhai Singh Pandher (respondent No. 2). Counsel for the petitioner contends that the learned trial court did not send the complaint for investigation by a police officer in compliance with the provisions of Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short "Cr.P.C.") and dismissed the same without complying with the mandatory requirements of the said provisions. It is further submitted that as Neelampal Kaur is in illegal custody of the accused, the petitioner had no means to get her medically examined and prove on the basis of medical opinion that she is not capacitated to make a rational decision and understand her well being. It is further argued that the impugned order may be set aside and the trial court may be directed to ensure presence of Neelampal Kaur to know her mental state and Neelampal Kaur may also be got medically examined to detect the crime committed by the accused.
(3.) I have heard counsel for the petitioner and perused the case file.;