1. Heard. 2. Notice. Mr. S.C. Gupta, learned Addl. Advocate General accepts notice on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 & 2. 3. It appears to be a case in which the petitioner-Ashok Kumar Shangloo and his real uncle-Avtar Krishan Shangloo (respondent No.3) are into litigation in order to inherit the property on the basis of a Will executed by late Sh. Nand Lal Shangloo. Late Sh. Nand Lal Shangloo left three sons namely Kuldeep Narain Shangloo (father of the petitioner), Tej Krishan Shangloo & respondent-Avtar Krishan Shangloo. 4. Through the instant petition, the petitioner is seeking issuance of a direction in the nature of mandamus to the official-respondents to register F.I.R., against respondent No.3 & 4 on the basis of a Will Deed, allegedly purported to have been executed by late Sh. Tej Krishan Shangloo, is forged one and was never executed or got registered. 5. I have heard Mr. V.B. Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner and gone through the petition and other documents attached thereto. 6. Since it is specifically averred in para 11 of the petition by the petitioner that with regard to the litigation going on between the parties, one such matter came to be presented and heard by the learned Financial Commissioner, J&K State, where the alleged forged Will came in discussion and respondent-Avtar Krishan Shangloo was asked to produce the Will in the Court. He did not produce the original Will and instead submitted a photo-stat copy of the Will in the Court and handed over another set of the same to him (petitioner). The alleged forged Will is annexed as Annexure-F. 7. Mr. Gupta submits that in order to know the genuineness of the Will, the petitioner went to the office of the Sub Registrar, Srinagar and came to know that no such entry with regard to the registration of the said Will was made in any of the Register. He submits that, in fact, late Sh. Tej Krishan Shangloo was lunatic and could not go to Srinagar in the year 1996 when the militancy was on its peak and, therefore, he never appeared before the Sub Registrar, Srinagar. Specific case of the petitioner is that it is all a forged document prepared by Avtar Krishan Shangloo (respondent No.3) with the connivance of Noor Mohd. Sheikh (respondent No.4) to grab the property left by late Sh. Tej Krishan Shangloo. 8. Specific case of the petitioner is that it is all a forged document prepared by Avtar Krishan Shangloo (respondent No.3) with the connivance of Noor Mohd. Sheikh (respondent No.4) to grab the property left by late Sh. Tej Krishan Shangloo. 8. On a specific query put to Mr. Gupta, as to whether after the petitioner came to know all about the aforesaid facts with regard to the forgery, any application was moved before learned Financial Commissioner for initiating criminal proceedings against the respondent- Avtar Krishan Shangloo during the pendency of the proceedings so that the Court could take cognizance of the said complaint, Mr. Gupta fairly states that no such formal application was moved in this regard. 9. In light of the aforesaid factual backdrop, I would have not shown any indulgence in the instant petition, yet keeping in view the totality of facts and circumstances, and without issuing notice to the private respondents, direct respondent No.1 through Director General of Police, J&K, to treat the instant writ petition as a representation on behalf of the petitioner in order to get all the facts enquired by any senior police official of his choice and on the basis thereof, in case he finds that the Will purported to have been executed by late Sh. Tej Krishan Shangloo S/o Pt. Nand Lal Shangloo before Sub Registrar, is forged one, he shall resort to necessary action in accordance with law. 10. Disposed of in the aforesaid terms. Copy of the order be sent to the concerned quarter(s) for compliance.