SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 73534

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mrs.Justice T.V.THAMILSELVI
PRATAP K.MOTURI – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE REP BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE – Respondent



IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated : 12.11.2025 Coram:

The Honourable Mrs.Justice T.V.THAMILSELVI Crl.A.No.335 of 2025 Pratap K.Moturi ...Appellant Versus

1.The State rep. by Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch, Team XVIII A, Chennai – 600 006.

2.Lalitha Mohan ...Respondents This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 372 of Cr.P.C praying to set aside the Judgment dated 24.01.2025 passed in C.A.No.17 of 2023 on the file of XVI Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai.

For Appellant : Mr.J.Pothiraj For Respondent – 1 : Mr.V.Meganathan, Govt. Advocate (Crl.Side)

For Respondent – 2 : Mr.B.A.Sanjay Prasanna

JUDGMENT

This Criminal Appeal has been filed by the Appellant seeking to set aside the Judgment dated 24.01.2025 in C.A.No.17 of 2023 passed by the learned XVI Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai.

2. The brief facts of the case are that Appellant’s father Mr.Moturi Sathyanarayana had executed a Will dated 20.05.1983 bequeathing the following two properties:

(i) Land and Building property at Gandhi Nagar, Adyar in favour of his two sons viz., Appellant and Mr.Raveendra Moturi.

(ii) Land property measuring an extent of 4 Acres situated at Numbai Mathura Puliambedu Village, Poonamallee in favour of his grandchildren viz., Nithil Kumar Moturi (son of Appellant), Srinivas Moturi (son of Mr.Raveendra Moturi) and Anuradha Moturi (daughter of M.K.Mohan & 2nd Respondent/Accused No.2). Out of the said property, 1.5 Acres allotted to Nithil Kumar Moturi; 1.5 Acres allotted to Srinivas Moturi and 1 Acre allotted to Anuradha Moturi.

3. The Appellant’s father Mr.Moturi Sathyanarayana had died on

06.03.1995. After his demise, a petition was filed to probate the said Will. At that time, Appellant came to know that M.K.Mohan (elder brother of Appellant) had fabricated the Will dated 04.03.1995 as if the same had been executed two days prior to the death of his father Mr.Moturi Sathyanarayana and based on the said Will, M.K.Mohan (elder brother of Appellant) had executed a Settlement Deed dated 01.02.2022 in favour of his wife viz., Mrs.Lalitha Mohan (2nd Respondent). In the fabricated Will dated 04.03.1995, it has been stated that Late Mr.Moturi Sathyanarayana had bequeathed the aforesaid 4 Acres of land in favour of M.K.Mohan (elder brother of Appellant). Therefore, Appellant had lodged a Complaint dated 16.08.2005 to 1st Respondent Police against his elder brother M.K.Mohan and Mrs.Lalitha Mohan (2nd Respondent).

4. Based on the complaint given by Appellant, 1st Respondent Police registered a case against M.K.Mohan and his wife, Mrs.Lalitha Mohan (2nd Respondent) and conducted investigation. After the completion of investigation, 1st Respondent Police filed the Charge Sheet as against M.K.Mohan (Accused No.1) and Mrs.Lalitha Mohan (2nd Respondent/Accused No.2) under Section 420 r/w. 34 and 175 of IPC. 5. The Trial Court has taken the case on file in C.C.No.46 of 2013.

During the course of trial, M.K.Mohan (Accused No.1) had died and hence, charges against him were abated. Before the Trial Court, on the side of prosecution, 6 persons were examined as witnesses P.W.1 to P.W.6 and 9 documents were marked as Exhibits P1 to P9, but, on the side of accused, no witnesses were examined and no documents were marked.

6. On appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, the Trial Court found that 2nd Respondent/Accused No.2 is guilty for commission of offence punishable under Section 420 r/w. 34 of IPC. Therefore, the Trial Court vide Judgment dated 26.12.2022 in C.C.No.46 of 2013, convicted the 2nd Respondent/Accused No.2 and sentenced her to undergo 3 years simple imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default, to undergo 6 weeks simple imprisonment and also, directed the 2nd Respondent/Accused No.2 to pay a sum of Rs.50,00,000/- as compensation to Mr.Srinivas Moturi (son of Mr.Raveendra Moturi).

7. Challenging the judgment of Trial Court, 2nd Respondent/Accused No.2 had preferred a Criminal Appeal in C.A.No.17 of 2023 before the XVI Additio

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top