Affidavit of Truth

Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 13

IN THE COURT OF ____ ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN

MAGISTRATE AT BANGALORE
P.C.R NO. /2023
In
CC NO /2023

BETWEEN

MR M R,SHIVASHANKAR
AND ANOTHER COMPLAINANT
AND

SMT.SEETHAMMA & OTHERS ACCUSED

AFFIDAVIT OF TRUTH

We, (1) M R Shiva Shankar, S/o late Ramaiah Naidu, aged about 59 years,
No.9, 24th Main, Ramaiah Garden, J P Nagar Bangalore-78, (2) M R
Madhusudhan, S/o late Ramaiah Naidu, Aged about 58 years, No.P1, Pent
House 4th floor, Vishnupriya apartments, 24 th Main, Ramaiah Garden, J P
Nagar Bangalore-78, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as follows:

1. We submit that, we are the complaints in the above case we are fully
conversant with the facts of the case and we are competent to swear to
this affidavit.

2. We submit that, we are the absolute owners in possession and


enjoyment of land bearing Sy.No.145/1, Old No.96/3, measuring 4 acre
28 guntas, of Kammanahalli Village, Begur Hobli, Bangalore South
Taluk, having acquired the same by virtue of the registered Partition
Deed, dated 17.05.2001 and Rectification Deed, dated 01.10.2004.

3. We submit that, originally the larger extent of the Schedule Property in


its original Sy.No.96, measured into 33 acre 23 guntas of Jodi Inamti
Kammanahalli Village covered under the Mysore Personal &
Miscellaneous Inam Abolition Act. After the Inam Abolition Act came into
force, all the Inam Lands were vested with the Government by operation
of law. Thereafter said land was bifurcated and Phoded into Sy.No.96/1,
measuring 3.00 acres, Sy.No.96/2, measuring 3 acre 06 guntas, and
Sy.No.96/3 measuring 27 acre 17 guntas respectively.
4. We submit that, the land bearing Sy.No.96/3, measuring 27 acre 17
guntas, was granted in favour of Sri.B.C.Krishnaswamy, vide No.lA.2 PET
1884/1959-60, as per the order dated 10.07.1960. The katha in-respect
of 27 Acres 17 Guntas of land was transferred accordingly in favour of
Sri.B.C.Krishnaswamy in the revenue record of Bangalore South Taluk
office. Thereafter Sri.B.C.Krishnaswamy sold the entire extent of land in
favour of Sri.Binny S/o Moses, under the registered Sale Deed dated
20.03.1957, vide document No.393/1956-57, Book-I, Volume:6, Pages
60 to 62, in the office of Sub-Registrar, Bangalore South Taluk and
inturn the said Sri.Binny S/o Moses, sold the entire 27 Acres 17 Guntas
of land, in favour of Ramaiah, my late father on 25.03.1967, vide
document No.6300/1966-67, Book-l, Volumne:633, Pages:231 to 234, in
the office of Sub Registrar Bangalore South Taluk.

5. We submit that, after the death of their father Sri.Ramaiah on


23.02.1976, on an application, the land tribunal out of the larger extent
of 27 Acres 17 Guntas, re-granted 10.00 acres of land in favour of
Sri.Binny, S/o Moses, in Sy.No.96/3, under case No.LRF.3990/1976-77.
Thereafter the land was phoded into two survey numbers, i.e from
Sy.No.96/3 to re-Sy.No.145/1 and re-Sy.No.145/2 asper the ADLR Order
dated 03.03.1993, the revenue authorities mistakenly limited the land
bearing measuring to an extent of 14 acre 14 guntas, in land bearing re-
Sy.No.145/2, instead of 10.00 acres, vide MR.20/80-81, and re-
Sy.No.145/1, to an extent of land measuring 13 Acres 03 Guntas, in
favour of our family.

6. We submit that, out of the 13 acre 03 guntas Mr.Ramaiah, his wife and
children sold the land measuring 3 acre 26 guntas in favor of
Smt.Jayanthi N Rao and retained with 9 acre 17 guntas. The remaining
extent of land measuring 9 acre 17 guntas was a subject matter of
partition on 17.05.2001, doc No.1552/2001-02, Book-1, stored in
volumes 158 to 163, in the office of Sub Registrar Bangalore South Taluk
and in turn by Rectification Deed, dated 01.10.2004, registered as
document No.BAS-1-17191/2004-05, of Book-1, stored in CD
No.BASD100, in the office of Sub-Registrar BSTQ the extent of share
came to be rectified, under the said deed the complainants herein
became absolute owners of the land measuring 2 acre 14 guntas each,
totally measuring 4 acre 28 guntas was fallen to the share of the
Complainants herein under item No.2 and 3 of the schedule to the
partition Deed. The katha in-respect of 9 Acres 17 Guntas of land was
transferred accordingly in favour of Smt.Susheelamma and others vide
MR.No.1/2001-02.

7. We submit that, out of the land fallen to the share of the brothers and
mother of the of the complainants herein viz., Smt.Susheelamma &
Mr.Ramprasad was got converted for residential purpose, vide, order of
Deputy Commissioner Bangalore bearing No.B.Dis.ALN.SR.(S)14/2002-
03, dated 18.07.2002, & No.B.Dis.ALN.SR.(S)211/2004-05, dated
02.05.2005, and developed into a residential apartment in land bearing
Sy.No.145/1.

8. We submit that, it is pertinent to note here that, even at the time of


conversion there was no Wisper of any declaration said to have been filed
in respect to land based on the report the Deputy Commissioner
accorded sanction for diversion of land from agricultural to non-
agricultural residential purposes, as on this day the said land is
residential apartment complex, under survey number 145/1 of
Kammanahalli Village deriving title to the property to larger no of people
as their parent title documents.

9. We submit that, when the things stood thus, the accused No.2, eldest
son of accused No.1 Viz., Mr.Chinnappa had allegedly challenged the
order of land tribunal for the Grant of occupancy rights in favour of the
one Mr.Binny S/o Mosses after a lapse of 14 years in 1993 in
WP.No.40538/1993, stating that the subject property is a Gomala land.
This Hon'ble Court in its single bench dismissed the WP.No.40538/1993,
vide its Order dated 30.11.1993 holding that the accused No.2 have no
locus standi to question the same. Thereafter the said order was
challenged before the division bench of this Hon'ble Court in writ appeal
vide WA.1/1994, dated 14.02.1994, the same was disposed of holding
that the subject land is not a Gomala Land and the grant of occupancy
rights does not arise.

10. We submit that, such being the case the accused No.1, recently all
of a sudden got the RTC for the year 1979-80 to 1983-84, tampered and
fabricated in her name, in column No.12, colluding with other accused
persons No.2 to 7, claiming to have granted by land tribunal with a
wearied approach of having strange case number, totally against the
principles of office rules and procedure. The changes have erupted
recently all of a sudden connecting to the year 1979 without any basis,
which was not in existence earlier when the same copies were produced
before the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore. If this Hon'ble
court peruses the signature and the date of order of MR.No.20A/80-81,
is mentioned as 11.09.1980, and that of the created MR.No.20B/80-81,
is mentioned as 11.07.1980, which is allegedly a subsequent Order in
3990A/76-77 created for the purpose of the case in the former date, on
04.09.1979 which is a clear proof of tampering the original Government
Record. The copies of the created and fabricated documents viz., (1) RTCs
for the year 1979-80 to 1983-84, (2) MR.NO.20B/80-81, (3)
MR.No.20A/80-81, (4) Form No.7, (5) Fabricated Order in 3990A/76-77,
dt 04.09.1979 in the name of Accused No.1, & Form No.10, in the name
of Accused no.1, are herewith produced, and marked Document Nos.15
to 20 respectively.

11. We submit that, during the process of conversion of land; the then
tahsildar Bangalore South Taluk had issued an endorsement/s dated
27.08.2001 & 12.10.2004, stating that no declaration application has
been filed before it. The Deputy Commissioner Bangalore, had made a
detailed search for conversion of land, in land bearing Sy.No.145/1, and
has satisfied that there is no declaration filed to this survey number, as
per the report submitted by the tahsildar Bangalore South taluk office,
such being the fact. It is absolutely clear that the documents have been
tampered and fabricated in the name of Seethamma colluding her
children, i.e Mr.Chinnapa, Srinivas & Manjunath for the purpose of
unlawful monetary gains.

12. We submit that, when the things stood thus, the accused No.1,

without any locus standi filed an application No. ನಂ.ಪಾ. ಭೂ. ಜಂ.ನಿ. ಅಪೀಲ್.

(ಬೆಂ.ನ).21/2022-23, before the accused No.8, wherein the accused No.8

Authority, without any notice to the parties, and without there being an
enquiry passed an Order on 01.06.2023 under Rule 50 to 55 of the KLR
Rules, 1966 without proper application of mind and verifying the records
had cancelled the phodi process and directed to conduct phodi afresh
and disposed-off the appeal setting-aside the Order of the ADLR in Hissa
1 and 2 of Survey Number 145 and so also in Sy.No.96, of kammanahalli
Village and directed the ADLR to conduct the Phod afresh, where the
land is not available at all to its original extent.

13. We submit that, it is pertinent to mention here that, recently all of


a sudden it is observed that, the RTC for the year 1979-80 to 1983-84,
appeared to be tampered in the name of Seethamma, these were not in
existence earlier when the brother of the complainants Mr.Ramprasad
and got the land converted for residential purposes as per the orders
Deputy Commissioner Bangalore, bearing No.B.Dis.ALN.SR.(S)14/2002-
03, dated 18.07.2002, fallen to his share under the Partition Deed. It is
very important to note here that the accused No.1 to 4 has not only
mutated the Government Records colluding with accused No.5 to 7 but
also has gone to an extent of proving the same to be correct. In this
aspect the accused No.1 to 4 had made all efforts to prove the false
documents to be correct and colluding with the Joint Director of Land
Records the accused No.8 have got the original survey record changed to
destroy the basic evidence, misusing the power. The Joint Director of
Land Records and survey settlement being in such a responsible job
without minding the parent title documents of the land owners and their
title having no authority to cancel the survey records on which there has
been a development and property rights has been assigned in favour of
the respective apartment owners, without considering the same without
minimum basic knowledge that the strange case number of LRF
3990A/1976-77, which has no roll of appearance in the revenue records,
has passed some illegal orders, the accused No.1 to 4 the revenue
records. The accused No.1 to 4 and another have criminally conspired
with each other, has got the survey records cancelled in its entirety for
the purpose of destroying of evidence. The act of the accused No.8 in
completely ignoring the limitation period and without analyzing any
reason as to what made him to condone the delay for 30 years and
without securing the presence of the original land owners and trial court
records based on the false documents have ordered to cancel the parent
title documents of the complaintans herein goes to show the clear
collusive nature of the accused No.8 hence is guilty of offence under
chapter XVIII of IPC for aiding and abetting the accused No.1 to 7 in
their attempt. In this stage a detailed investigation is required to be
conducted against Smt.Seethamma, her childrens, Mr.Chinnappa,
Mr.Srinivas and Mr.Manjunath, Tahsildar Bangalore South Taluk Office,
Record Keeper /Superintendent of Records Bangalore South Taluk
Office, Joint Director of land Records and Survey Settlement Bangalore,
the accused No.1 to 8, to take action in accordance with law, for
criminally conspired with each other, fabricated and tampered the
documents, and also has fraudulently and dishonestly representing to
the documents and using it as genuine, particularly knowing fully well
that the documentary evidences that he is relying with is a forged
document, particularly in Government Revenue Records creating a false
LRF Order, vide LRF.3990A/1976-77 and MR.20A & 20B, passed by the
tribunal, wherein as per the hand book of office rules and procedure the
procedure of adopting the strange number with alphabets, is not
permissible in law. The revenue MR registered has been mutated, which
is not forth coming in the certified copies produced earlier before the
district administrative offices for diversion of land, which is nothing but
clear case of forgery, made colluding with the tahsildar Bangalore south
taluk and their record room people and JDLR assisting them to file a
false case based on the false documents to be true. The act of the
accused No.1 to 4 is a clear case of tampering a valuable property
documents government records by cheating the public and harming a
reputation of the complainants. The accused No.1 to 4 are indulging in
counterfeiting the documents public records and proposing it to be true,
knowing full well that will harm the reputation of the complainants. The
act of the tahsildar in collusion of the accused No.1 to 4 are nothing but
tampering the signature mark of the chairperson and members of the
land tribunal. There cannot be second declaration filed in the case when
the tahsildar himself has issued numerous endorsements as no
declaration has been filed for conversion of land.

14. We submit that, the accused No.5 to 7 colluding with the accused
No.1 to 4 have the fabricated records in the name of accused No.1,
shown in respect of land in Sy.No.96/3, measuring 6 acre 06 guntas of is
shown as Rs.9.10, wherein the revenue fixed under the KLR rules for
land measuring 13 acres 13 guntas in land bearing Sy.No.145/1 is
Rs.5.00, thus this itself is clear proof to show that the documents relied
by Accused no.1 is fabricated and concocted one.
15. We submit that, the original LRF order passed by the land tribunal
in its number 3990/76-07 is registered on 31.05.1976 and disposed on
08.11.1979. Wherein the alleged LRF order said to have been passed by
the land tribunal in its subsequent number 3990A/76-07 claimed to be
filed on 31.05.1976 and disposed on 04.07.1979, which is completely
after thought. Further the form No.10, originally issued by the taluk
office mentions all the averments of the revenue records but strangely
the records relied upon by the accused No.1, in the Saguvahali allegedly
issued by the taluk office has strangely written in English language. This
itself is clearly shows that the document is created one which is very
clear that the documents are fabricated one. The complainants got
applied for the suspicious documents of grant relied on by the accused
No.1, before the accused No.5, on Application filed by the complainants,
the 5th accused vide communication dated 16.11.2023 informed the
Complainants that no such case of grant record is available in the
cataloging and indexing records. Further the Complainants also applied
and obtained the copy of the Register of occupancy rights under Form
No.7. The said Register does not contain entries regarding application
filed by the accused No.1. hence it is clear that there is a high-level fraud
has been taken place by tampering the documents in Government
Records.

16. All the efforts of the complainants have gone futile. Thereafter the
complainant had lodged a police complainant dated 20.03.2023, under
section 154(1) of CRPC before the Hulimavu police complainant for
necessary action but the Hulimavu police has issued an endorsement
dated 20.03.2023, and has not taken any action against the accused
persons.

17. We submit that, the act of accused No.5 to 7, without any least
concern and integrity over the state and the public at large for being
responsible to protect the original documents in its custody have allowed
the third parties to meddle with it and has tampered the original records
without any authority in order to give color of original, for the fake
documents. This is nothing but criminal breach of trust of the public at
larger, the accused No.5 to 8 are not fit persons to continue in the said
job as they have been the root cause for emerging the unforeseen
litigation by the public at larger who are affected by the said changes.
The purpose and effort of the quasi-judicial officers should always be to
bring down the litigation, instead on the other hand the accused No.5 to
8 colluding with accused No.1 to 4 have given rise to multiple litigations
unnecessarily for merger some of money. The interference of this Hon'ble
court is quite necessary as the police are scared to enquire into the
matter as they are all public servants and unless there is an order from
this Hon'ble court the police are scared to enquire into the matter.
Everyone is equal before the law. This Hon'ble court has got ample power
to take cognizance of the matter, and it is apt and necessary to direct the
jurisdictional police to enquire into the matter and to file a detailed final
report in the above case.

18. T submit that, the accused No.5 to 8 colluding accused no.1 to 4


were not supposed to breach the trust of the complainant being in
responsible job and position and has dishonestly misappropriated the
power not only fabricated and tampered the public records to their own
use and connivence, but also dishonestly used and disposed the property
in favour of accused No.1 to 4, in clear violation of express terms of law
and the accused No.8 have not even verified the existence of the parent
documents and its liability on the public at large in order to betray the
complainants for monetary benefit and to sabotage the right of the
complainants, have passed an illegal order in favour of the accused
No.1, without the knowledge of the complainants by condoning the delay
of 35 years. The accused No.8 is also a partner in crime and equally
liable for punishment under the law in force. The act of the accused No.1
to 8 is nothing but cheating. The accused No.1 to 4 having criminally
conspired with each other with dishonest intention to cheat the
complainants have intentionally colluding with accused No.5 to 8 have
created the documents against the complaints and have converted the
status of the said property to its non-existence nature for more monetary
benefit which is nothing but an act of cheating. Hence the accused No.1
to 8 are liable for punishment under the law.

19. The complainant submits that, the accused No.1 to 4 having


criminally conspired with the other accused has abated, the accused
No.5 to 7 and in collusion with the other persons, knowing fully well he
is doing the wrong, the accused No.5 to 7 being the public servant
knowing fully well has concealed the fact and has issued with the,
fabricated documents to defraud the complaints and cause to lose their
identity of the property, by disobeying the law wilfully, and has framed
an incorrect document with intent to cause injury.

20. We submit that, the accused 1 to 4, not only concealed the facts
and fabricated the fake documents but also colluding with accused No.5
to 7, fraudulently and dishonestly, with intent to injure and annoy the
complainants, has made a false claim in a Court of Justice as if the
accused No.1 is the absolute owner of the property in question in
OS.1312/2023, on the file of Senior Civil Judge Bangalore Rural, for the
reliefs of declaration and injunction knowing to be false. The accused
No.1 to 7 joining hands with each other have counterfeited with stamp of
the land tribunal issued by Government for the purpose of revenue and
fabrication of documents.

21. The accused No.5 to 7, being the public servants was supposed to
protect the trust of the complainants and public at large being the
custodian of records the accused No.5 has breached the trust of the
complainants by tampering the documents within their custody and has
cheated the complainant, being public servant, fraudulently concealed to
removes the entries of the property of the complainants and has assisted
the other accused persons to fraudulently remove the entries pertaining
to the complainants by inserting their names. Thereby they have
committed mischief causing destruction to their property, by forging the
documents and land signatures of the land tribunal, that too a public
register which has to be maintained intact. The accused persons
colluding with all the accused especially with accused No.1 to 4 and 5 to
7 have made efforts to obtained an order claiming it to be true and has
confirmed the order being a class -1, officer knowing fully well such
documents does not exist and has approved the order at his hands hence
all the accused are partners in crime and are liable for punishment with
others.

22. The complainant submits that, when the jurisdictional police did
not take any action against the accused persons for abetment, Public
servant concealing design being his duty to prevent, criminal conspiracy,
for disobedience of lay by a Public servant, framing an incorrect
document to cause injury, criminal breach of trust, counterfeiting, stamp
and signature of the Government, by a public servant having full
knowledge, fraudulently removal of documents of property, forging a
public record, and trying to use forged documents as genuine as if it is
issued by government. the complainant has filed a complainant to the
Commissioner of Police, under section 154(3) of CRPC requesting to take
action addressing to Hon'ble Chief Minister Government of Karnataka,
Additional Chief Secretary Government of Karnataka, Hon'ble Home
Minister, Government of Karnataka, Hon'ble Revenue Minister,
Government of Karnataka, Deputy Commissioner Bangalore Urban,
Assistant Commissioner Bangalore sub-division, Commissioner of Police,
Hon'ble Karnataka Lokayuktya on 05.10.2023 and Regional Revenue
Commissioner, Bangalore Division, on 07.10.2023, for necessary action.
Despite the complainants as stated supra no action has been taken by
the jurisdiction police so far. Despite forwarding the complainant so far,
no action has been taken. Hence left no other alternative the
complainant is before this Hon'ble court for necessary direction.

23. The complainant submits that, the accused No.5 to 8 have acted
arbitrary playing with the life of complainants and public at large by
tampering the records for more monetary benefits by misusing their
power colluding with accused No.1 to 4 and is nothing but criminal
breach of trust and thus have cheated the complainants. The accused
No.1 to 8, have clearly admitted that they have trying to fraudulently
alienate the Schedule Property for third parties for merger sum of money
the accused without feeling guilty for the action committed by them has
as on this day pretending to be correct.

24. The complainant submits that, by the act of the accused No.1 to 4,
it is evident that the accused No.1 to 8 with a view of deceiving the
complainants in order to induce them, cause injury to their mind,
reputation of the complainants have resorted to such illegal acts of
criminally intimidating and troubling the complainants and its office
bearers by entering into a criminal conspiracy with the common
dishonest intention. The accused No.1 to 8 are therefore guilty of having
committed offences punishable under Section 108, 119, 120B, 166, 167,
209, 255, 409, 418, 420, 424, 426, 465, 466, 471, & 506, R/w Section
34 of IPC.

25. We submit that, the complainants filed a complaint before the


Station House Officer, hulimavu Police Station, but the police instead of
registering the complaint refused to register the compliant on the ground
that it is a civil matter and has issued an acknowledgement. Thereafter
the complaint lodged before the Hon'ble Chief Minister Government of
Karnataka, Additional Chief Secretary Government of Karnataka, Hon'ble
Home Minister, Government of Karnataka, Hon'ble Revenue Minister,
Government of Karnataka, Regional Revenue Commissioner, Bangalore
Division, Deputy Commissioner Bangalore Urban, Assistant
Commissioner Bangalore sub-division, Commissioner of Police, and
Hon'ble Karnataka Lokayuktya on 05.10.2023 & 07.10.2023, seeking
necessary direction against the Jurisdictional Police to direct them to
register the complaint. So far no action has been taken by them. The
complainant has complied the provisions of Section 154(1) & 154(3) of
CrPC and the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in
the case of Priyanka Srivastava & Others Vs State of UP and Others. The
police authorities instead of registering any action despite receipt of the
said complaint is silent as it is a Civil Matter. Hence the complaint is
before this Hon'ble court for necessary reliefs.

26. We submit that, the Complainants learnt from reliable sources


that after the complainant’s approach to the accused persons, the
accused persons with an intention to defraud and defeat the
Complainant’s right under the guise of the order of accused No.8, the
accused persons colluding and conspiring with each other are trying to
lodge false claims against the complainants and to knock out the
valuable property of the complainants with an intention to cheat, by this
the accused No.5 to 8 have breached the trust developed by the
complainants on them under the bonafide beliefs for which are
accountable for. The Complainants further submit that, if the accused
No.1 to 8 are not prosecuted for the offences committed on the
complainants, the rights of the Complainants under law will be
jeopardized.

27. We submit that, it is clear that the intention of the accused No.1 to
4, colluding with accused No.5 to 8 and conspiring with each other with
a common intention, have cheated the complainants by way of fraud and
for illegal monetary benefits, beside have threatened the complainants
with dire consequences in the event of any question about their acts and
that they are very influential. By the aforesaid act, all the accused
persons have committed an offence of for abetment, Public servant
concealing design being his duty to prevent, criminal conspiracy, for
disobedience of lay by a Public servant, framing an incorrect document
to cause injury, criminal breach of trust, counterfeiting, stamp and
signature of the Government, by a public servant having full knowledge,
fraudulently removal of documents of property, forging a public record,
and trying to use forged documents as genuine as if it is issued by
government, against the complainants and thereby accused persons are
liable for prosecution before this Hon’ble court for the aforesaid offences,
with a common intention. The complainants have filed an application for
dispensation for permission to prosecute the accused No.5 to 8, as there
is every possibility of destroyed of evidence. The complainant has
therefore filed the above complaint and the offences have been committed
by all the accused within the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble court.

28. The Complainant submit that, pursuant to the express provision of


law the accused No.5 to 8 by utilizing their power was not supposed to
cheat the complainant colluding with accused No.1 to 4 have no right to
cause loss and hardship. The act of mal versions that was committed by
the accused No.1 to 8 are against to the law and principle of natural
justice in particular opposed to public policy. The accused have no right
to misuse their power to meddle with the public records especially
ignoring the rights of the Complainants.

29. The Complainant submit that, the Accused have come out openly
with a hostile attitude by not complying the terms of liability conferred by
law under and attempting to de-fraud the complainants by utilizing their
beliefs after and such act of the accused persons indicates and amounts
to refusal to perform their part of job conferred by the government and as
such the cause has arisen to the Complaint to file the above
Complainant and hence the Complainants with no other alternative has
approached this Hon'ble Court for the necessary reliefs.

30. We submit that, the complainant has complied the provisions of Section
154(1) & 154(3) of CrPC and the directions issued by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court of India in the case of Priyanka Srivastava & Others Vs
State of UP and Others. The police authorities instead of registering any
action despite receipt of the said complaint is silent as it is a Civil Matter.
Hence the complaint is before this Hon'ble court for necessary reliefs.
31. We submit that, if the accused persons are not prosecuted for the
offences committed on by them, the rights of the Complainants available
under law will be jeopardized. The offences have been committed by all
the accused within the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble court. Hence the
complaint is well within the jurisdiction. The Complainant having no other
alternative has approached this Hon’ble Court for the necessary reliefs.
32. We submit that, we have therefore filed the above complaint and as
the offences have been committed by all the accused within the
jurisdiction of this Hon'ble court.

WHEREFORE, in the interest of justice and equity this Hon’ble court may
be pleased to direct the jurisdictional police to register the case as prayed for in
the complaint.

We declare that these are our names and signatures and the contents of
this affidavit are all true and correct to the best of our knowledge, belief and
information.

IDENTIFIED BY ME

ADVOCATE DEPONENT
BANGALORE
DATE: /12/2023
NO. OF CORRECTIONS……

You might also like