The Karnataka High Court on Monday issued notice to the State government on a plea filed by Bollywood singer Maqsood M Ali, popularly known as Lucky Ali, challenging closure of a criminal case involving allegations of forgery, cheating and illegal transfer of family properties worth crores.
Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde issued notice on Ali's plea challenging a Bengaluru magistrate's order accepting a the closure report filed by the police in the case.
Ali has sought to set aside a February 18 order passed by the I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (ACMM), Bengaluru, accepting the closure report filed by the Yelahanka New Town police in the case.
According to Ali's plea, the magistrate accepted the closure report without granting him an opportunity to file a protest petition or hearing his objections to the police investigation.
He has sought a direction to the magistrate to provide him an opportunity to challenge the closure report.
The case arose from allegations that certain accused persons conspired to forge the signatures of Ali's late father, Mehmood Ali, and stepmother, Tahera Mehmood Ali, on General Power of Attorney (GPA) and Special Power of Attorney (SPA) documents dated November 9, 1989, to facilitate the transfer of immovable properties.
According to the complaint, the properties in question include agricultural lands situated in Vasudevapura, Kenchenahalli and Govindapura villages in Yelahanka hobli of Bengaluru North taluk.
Ali has alleged that the investigation conducted by the Crime Investigation Department's Economic Offences Division was defective and failed to adequately examine crucial aspects concerning the genuineness of the signatures and the registration of the power of attorney documents.
The magistrate had on March 12, 2024 directed the police to conduct further investigation and submit a report after considering the objections raised by Ali against an earlier closure report.
However, even the subsequent proceedings culminated in the acceptance of the closure report on February 18 without affording him an adequate opportunity to contest the closure of the case.
The petition has also alleged irregularities in the handling of certified copies of the closure report and the proceedings before the magistrate.