T.P.S.MANN, J. - (1.) THE petitioners are seeking quashing of criminal complaint No. 81 of 1998 filed by respondent Atma Ram against them and setting aside of the order dated 16.3.2001 passed by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Kurukshetra, whereby they have been summoned for offences under Sections 419, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC.
(2.) THE subject-matter of the complaint in question is a Will dated 25.11.1965 purported to have been executed and thumb-marked by Raja Ram. According to the respondent/complainant, the Will in question was a forged and fabricated document. In preliminary evidence the complainant examined himself as CW-1 besides Kanwal Pal, Peon, Tehsil Officer as CW-2, Devender Parsad Document Expert as CW-3 and Mihan Singh as CW-4. After perusing the preliminary evidence, learned Judicial Magistrate summoned the petitioners as mentioned above, as accused.
(3.) THE controversy regarding the Will in question was upheld by Sub-Judge Ist Class, Karnal on 28.11.1969. In para 11 of the said judgment, it was held as under :- "The Will Ex. D-1 is dated 25.1.1965. A few days before the death of Raja Ram this was scribed by Shame Singh DW-2, who is a very qualified man and is the son of Nathu defendant. He stated that Raja Ram executed the Will in suit with his free volition and without any pressure. The Will is attested by Ramji Lal DW-1 and Sulekh Chand DW-2, both of whom are Lamberdars of their respective villages. I have not been able to find anything to disbelieve their testimony. Molu Ram PW-4 admitted that Ramji Lal had no dispute with Raja Ram. Pirthi Singh PW-2 also stated that Ramji Lal and Sulekh Chand were on visiting terms with Raja Ram. I have, thus, little doubt about the due execution of validity of the Will and it was most natural in the circumstances of the case...." ;