JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to call for records in Crime No. 365 of 2017 on the file of the first respondent police, quash the same.)

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the accused Nos. 1, 2 and 3 in Crime No. 365 of 2017 on the file of the first respondent/Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch, Forgery Wing, Chennai, to quash the said First Information Report.

2. It must be mentioned that Crime No. 365 of 2017 had been registered on a complaint given by the second respondent/defacto complainant. The first petitioner/A-1 is the mother-in-law of the second respondent/defacto complainant. The second petitioner/A2 is the brother-in-law of the second respondent/defacto complainant. The third petitioner/A3 is the Advocate for the first and second petitioners.

3. A Textile Mill Company named M/s. Kanniamman Cotton Textiles (P) Ltd., was run by the first and second petitioners and also by the husband of the second respondent/defacto complainant. The husband of the second respondent/defacto complainant died a road traffic accident on 25.06.2004. The second respondent/defacto complainant, as legal heir was entitled to the shares which her husband had held in M/s. Kanniamman Cotton Textiles (P) Ltd., and also to the properties, which he was also entitled. Seeking her allotment of the shares for which she claimed entitlement as legal heir of her deceased husband, the defacto complainant filed C.P.No. 61 of 2005 before the Company Law Board at Chennai.

4. The first and second petitioners herein were shown as respondents in that Company Petition. During the proceedings before the Company Law Board, the first and second petitioners produced a will claiming that it had been executed by the late husband of the second respondent/defacto complainant bequeathing the shares which he had in M/s. Kanniamman Cotton Textiles (P) Ltd., to them / the first and second petitioners herein. The defacto complainant thereafter filed an application before the Company Law Board to forward the said Will to the Tamil Nadu Forensic Science Laboratory to test the genuinety of the signature of her husband. A report had been received on 17.04.2009 opining that the Will was a forged document. The first and second petitioners herein filed an appeal in Company Appeal No.12 of 2013. This came up for consideration before a learned Single Judge of this Court, who by an order dated 08.06.2015 had dismissed the Appeal.

5. Claiming that she had been cheated and deprived of the shares of the said Company and also the properties in which she and her son were entitled to as legal representatives of her deceased husband, the second respondent had given a complaint to the first respondent on 28.10.2017. On the basis of the said complaint, First Information Report in Crime No. 365 of 2017 had been registered by the first respondent under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120(b) IPC against not only the petitioners herein but also against five other accused. This First Information Report is now sought to be quashed by the petitioners/A-1, A-2 and A-3.

6. Heard Mr. B.R. Shankaralingam, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr.E.Raj Thilak, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for the first respondent and Mr.P.Ravi Shankar Rao, learned counsel for the second respondent.

7. It is the contention of Mr. B.R.Shankaralingam, learned counsel for the petitioners that the finding with respect to the Will by the Forensic Department was given in the year 2010. Even much prior to that, the defacto complainant had field a Civil Suit seeking partition and separate possession, which had been partly decreed and as against the same, both sides had preferred First Appeals which are now pending. It is also pointed out that the defacto complainant had also given a similar complaint on 29.10.2015 and she had also filed Crl.O.P.No. 5750 of 2016 seeking a direction to register a case based on the facts of the said complaint. That p