MANILA, Philippines, Nov 21, (Agencies): The National Prosecution Service (NPS) of the Department of Justice (DOJ) has absolved a Filipino-Indian businessman, his mother, and five others from a criminal complaint accusing them of "falsifying documents" related to family-owned properties.

In a 20-page resolution dated October 26, 2023, the NPS dismissed the complaint filed by the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) on behalf of Filipino-Indian complainant Amith P. Chandiramani. Amith had accused his brother, Rajiv P. Chandiramani, of falsifying public documents, specifically under Article 172, paragraph 1 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC), in connection with Article 171 regarding falsification by a public officer, employee, notary, or ecclesiastic minister.

The resolution also cleared the accused individuals: Pushpa Chandiramani (mother), Janet De Luna Cardinal, Maria Anita T. Turqueza, Rommel S. Olaybar, Christina M. Gutierrez, and Angelito L. Manuel.

The NPS emphasized that Amith failed to mention in his complaint affidavit that he had previously filed a similar complaint in July 2022. This earlier complaint, filed before the Office of the City Prosecutor in Makati City, involved the sale and mortgage documents of the same real properties mentioned in the recent case.

In his complaint, Amith asserted ownership of two properties in Makati City, alleging they were sold without his consent while he was confined at the Metro Psych Facility Roads and Bridges Facility. He also claimed that his deceased father's properties in Quezon City were sold to Royal Brothers and Mayview Philippines, Inc., despite his father's passing during those years. Rajiv was associated with both buyer companies.

The resolution highlighted that Amith and Rajiv had previously executed a compromise agreement on Aug 1, 2022, settling their disputes and claims related to their deceased father's estate. As part of the agreement, Rajiv committed to paying Amith a total of P150,000,000 in installments.

The document concluded that the compromise agreement, resembling an extrajudicial compromise agreement, contained all the elements of a valid contract. It noted that Amith's recognition of the validity of the property transfers, his knowledge, and consent indicated in the agreement effectively negated his claim of falsification.

In light of these circumstances, the NPS determined that the signatures on the contested sale and mortgage instruments were not falsified, as Amith's own actions and admissions contradicted his claim.