IMPORTANT POINTS
When a document is executed by a person claiming a property which is not his, he is not claiming that he is someone else nor is he claiming that he is authorised by someone else. Therefore, execution of such document (purporting to convey some property of which he is not the owner) is not execution of a false document as defined under Section 464 of the Code. If what is executed is not a false document, there is no forgery. If there is no forgery, then neither Section 467 nor Section 471 of the Code is attracted.

ORDER :

These petitions are filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C seeking to quash all further proceedings in C.C.No.221/2016 pending on the files of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Kasargod.

2. The petitioner in Crl.M.C.No.7092 of 2016 is the 1st accused, those in Crl.M.C.No.7373 of 2016 are the accused Nos.2 to 5 and the petitioner in Crl.M.C.No.2432 of 2015 is the 6th accused in the aforesaid case. They have been hauled up to answer a charge under Sections 465, 468, 471, 482 r/w. Section 34 of the IPC.

3. The party respondent herein filed a complaint before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Kasaragod, in the year 2014, wherein it is alleged as follows:

The 2nd respondent is the Managing Trustee of Shree Varadaraja Venkataramana Temple at Kasaragod, an ancient temple of the ‘Gouda Saraswatha Brahmin’ community. It is alleged that Shrimad Sudheendra Thirtha Swamiji is the ‘Madathipathi’ of Shri Kashi Math Samsthan at Varanasi. It is the “Dharma Peeth” of the Gouda Saraswatha Brahmin community. In the year 1989, the 1st accused, who was then known as Sivananda Pai, accepted Sanyasa Deeksha and he came to be known as Raghavendra Thirtha. As part of a prolonged grooming process, he was entrusted with certain duties with effect from 12.12.1994. He is alleged to have performed his duties till 04.11.1999. By declaration dated 19/07/2000, the Guru and 'Madathipathi', Shrimad Sudheendra Thirtha Swamiji, is alleged to have relieved him from all duties and responsibilities. It is alleged that after having been divested from all duties, the 1st accused styling himself as the 'Madathipathi' of Shri.Kashi Math Samsthan, and with the active assistance of the other accused, brought out a publication by name 'Srivyasavani'. In the said publication, the 1st accused is alleged to have proclaimed himself as the ‘Madathipathi’ of Shri.Kashi Math Samsthan with intent to fraudulently and dishonestly mislead 'Gouda Saraswatha Brahmin' community and the devotees of Shri.Kashi Math Samsthan, for making unlawful gain. It is alleged that the booklet by name 'Srivyasavani' was printed in the press run by the 6th accused and the 3rd accused was the Circulation Manager. Accused Nos.2, 4 and 5 are alleged to have contributed articles to the booklet and thereby aided the acts of the 1st accused. The complaint filed as aforesaid was forwarded to the police by the learned Magistrate and Crime No.979/2014 was registered at the Kasaragod Police Station. After completing investigation, final report was laid before the learned Magistrate on 5.5.2016, interalia, under Sections 465, 468, 471 and 482 of the IPC.

4. Sri.S.Sreekumar, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the 1st accused, contended that the allegations in the final report, even if it is taken as such in its entirety, will not make out any offence as against the petitioners herein. According to the learned counsel, it is evident from the complaint itself that the 1st accused was anointed as the Swamiji of Samsthan in the year 1994 and he had continued as such till 19.07.2000. The 1st accused was considered as the spiritual head by a section of the community. This led to a bitter feud between two factions and the lodging the complaint is just an offshoot of the strife between the two sections. Referring to the booklet published by the accused, he would contend that the same is published by the disciples by showing the 1st accused as the head of the Math and his name and photograph are printed in the front and the back of the booklet. In the preface itself, it is mentioned that Shrimad Raghavendra Thirtha Swamy is the 'Madathipathi' and his photo and the insignia of the 1st accused are depicted. In the same manner, in the back cover, the photograph of the 1st accused is clearly shown. It is contended that in order to attract the offence under Section 463 of the IPC, the condition precedent is that the accused should make a false document. To constitute a false document, it needs to be shown