IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 20-02-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN & Crl.M.P.No.17470 of 2023

1. C.L.Selvaraj S/o. Mr.Lucas Naidu

2. O.S. Josephine W/o. Mr.C.L.Selvaraj

3. C.S.Santhosh Raj S/o. Mr.C.L.Selvaraj, all are residing at No.54, Tirupathi Nagar, Valasaravakkam, Chennai - 600 087.

..Petitioner(s)

Vs

1. State Rep.By Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Tiruvallur. Ref.Cr.No.46/2010

2. Mr C.J.Antony Paul, Flat No - I Archana Castle, No 4/23 St.Patrick Church Road, Butt Road, St.Thomas Mount, Chennai-600 015 (R2 Suo Motu Impleaded as per Order Dt 8/11/2023 in Crl Rc/1858/2023)

..Respondent(s)

Prayer: This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 397 r/w. 401 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records in CC.No.43/2011 on the file of the Hon’ble Judicial Magistrate No.I, Tiruvallur and Set aside the order passed in the Crl.MP.3060/2023 dated 21.09.2023 and discharge the petitioner of all the alleged offences in CC.No.43/2011 on the file of the Hon’ble Judicial Magistrate No.I, Tiruvallur.

For Petitioner(s): Mr.R.Rajarathinam, Senior Counsel for Mr.S.V.Pravin Rathinam For Respondent(s): Mr.R.Vinothraja Government Advocate(Crl. side) for R1 No appearance for R2

ORDER

The Revision challenges the dismissal of the discharge petition filed by the petitioners who are arrayed as A2 to A4 in CC.No.43 of 2011 filed for the offences under Sections 420, 465, 468, 471 and 34 IPC.

2.The gist of the prosecution case is that one Prakashammal owned

15 acres of land in Govindhamedu Village at Thiruvallur District; that she had executed a registered Will in the year 1989 bequeathing 5 acres of land to the defacto complainant and 7 acres and 14 cents of land to one Jayaprakash, who was then a minor; that the said Jayaprakash predeceased Prakashammal; that the said 7 acres and 14 cents of land reverted to the said Prakashammal; that after her death, the first accused, who is the husband of one of the legal heirs of the son of the said Prakashammal had forged a Will, said to have been executed by the deceased Prakashammal in the year 1991 and claimed right over the property measuring 7 acres 14 cents; that thereafter, he executed a Power of Attorney in favour of the first petitioner/A2 on 28.06.2006, by virtue of which, the first petitioner had executed a sale deed in favour of the second petitioner/A3, who in turn, executed a settlement deed in favour of third petitioner/A4 on 19.04.2010; that in the meanwhile, a rectification deed was executed by the first accused on 26.10.2007 by stating that the property was acquired by the first accused by a registered Will executed by the said Prakashammal on 30.08.1991; and thus, all the petitioners along with the first accused had committed the aforesaid offences.

3.The petitioners sought for discharge before the trial Court on the ground that the prosecution had not produced any materials to show that the Will dated 30.08.1991 executed by Prakashammal was forged; that one of the legal heirs of the son of Prakashammal viz., Mary Josephine had filed a suit in O.S.No.110 of 2010 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Thiruvallur for partition and also for declaration that the Will in favour of A1 was forged; that the said issue is therefore, pending before the civil Court; and that in any case, the petitioners cannot be accused of forgery as they are purchasers for valid consideration. The trial Court dismissed the discharge petition on the ground that the points raised by the petitioner cannot be adjudicated at the stage of charge framing.

4.(i) Mr.R.Rajarathinam, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the first accused had executed a power of attorney in favour of the first petitioner in the year 2006; that thereafter, a sale deed was executed by the first petitioner in favour of the second petitioner on the basis of the power of attorney; that the second petitioner, in turn, executed a settlement deed in favour of the third petitioner; th