The judicial process aims to uncover the truth, and criminal courts must consider all incriminating material that arises during inquiry, even if not initially pleaded by the complainant.

1. The petitioners had been summoned as accused in the criminal complaint (CC Nos.2869/2005 – 328 RBT/13) of the first respondent (complainant) by order dated 11.04.2007 of the Metropolitan Magistrate on allegations of they having committed offences punishable under Sections 465, 468, 506, 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). The complainant then led pre-charge evidence upon conclusion of which the Metropolitan Magistrate considered the material and, by order dated 19.09.2013, found no case made out for putting the petitioners (the accused persons) on trial, thereby directing their discharge. The said order was challenged by the complainant in the court of Sessions invoking its revisional jurisdiction by filing a petition (Crl. Rev. 54/2014) which was allowed, by order dated 24.04.2015, setting aside the order of discharge and instead directing the Metropolitan Magistrate to frame charges for offences punishable under Sections 120B and 419, 420, 468, 471 IPC read with Section 34 and 120B IPC.

2. The present petition has been filed invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr. PC) to assail the correctness, propriety and legality of the order of the revisional court, the prime contention being that the continuation of the proceedings before the trial court would be an abuse of process of law, the revisional court having exceeded its jurisdiction by directing charges to be framed for offences which have been specified, reliance in this context being placed on decisions of the Supreme Court reported as Gangula Ashok and Anr. Vs. State of A.P., (2000) 2 SCC 504 and Maikaal Fibres Ltd. and Anr. Vs. ICICI Bank Ltd. and ors., (2005) 12 SCC 229.

3. Having heard the learned counsel on both sides and having carefully gone through the record, this court finds no merit in the petition at hand. The reasons are set out hereinafter.

4. It appears from the averments in the present matter and also from the pleadings in the civil litigation in which the parties had been earlier engaged that they are related to each other. The dispute revolves around the estate of late Smt. Bohti Devi, it statedly including the share in lands comprised in Khasra nos.156, 157, 158 Min., 159, 219, 220, 271, 276, 277, 282, 290, 295, 299 and 300 situated at Village-Ibrahimpur, Delhi i.e. 54 Bighas, 15 Biswas recorded in revenue record vide Khata No.9/8 and in Khasra No.17/1/2 (1-10), 2/2 (2-0), 3/2(0-5), 9/2 (3-10) total measuring 07 Bighas 13 Biswas, situated at Village Burari, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “the property”). The complainant is described as adopted son of Smt. Bohti Devi. It appears that after her death, he had moved an application before Sub-Divisional Magistrate (SDM) for mutation of the lands in his name. His application was dismissed by the SDM on 22.07.1991. This led to litigation before the revenue authorities, the case having been contested by Mr. Surender Kumar, father of the petitioners. Eventually, in terms of order dated 22.05.1995 of the Financial Commissioner, the mutation was recorded in the name of the complainant. A challenge was brought to the said order by Surinder Kumar by writ petition [WP(C) 222/1995] before this court but the same having been later withdrawn.

5. It is admitted case of the complainant that on the request of Surinder Kumar, he had later executed two documents both dated 30.09.2000, one being General Power of Attorney (GPA) and the other being Special Power of Attorney (SPA). The said documents having been brought on record during pre-charge evidence and formally proved as exhibits CW1/7 and CW1/8 respectively. By both these documents, the complainant appointed and constituted the second petitioner Sudhir Kumar as his attorney – general attorney to manage, control, look after and supervise the lands in question and take various steps including for sale or transfer or executing proper deeds and documents to present them for registration and han