Dismissed

Akhlaque Ahmed Mohammed v. State of Maharashtra (Applicant)

Bombay HC10 Jul 2018CST/77/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In succession proceedings where a Caveator alleged a Will was forged, the Court dismissed the State of Maharashtra's application for a certified copy of the Will. The Court held that parallel criminal investigations or forensic opinions on the same issue would overreach the civil court's jurisdiction to determine authenticity. The Kurla Police was directed to note the pending civil dispute.

What did the court decide?

Chamber Summons No. 77 of 2018 is dismissed. Kurla Police directed to take note of pending civil dispute.

Akhlaque Ahmed Mohammed Vs State of Maharashtra… — Succession and Inheritance | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

28-CST77-18.DOC

¶2

Atul

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY TESTAMENTARY AND INTESTATE JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 77 OF 2018

¶4

IN

¶5

TESTAMENTARY PETITION NO. 1639 OF 2016

¶6

The State of Maharashtra…Applicant
Versus
Akhlaque Ahmed Mohammed…Petitioner

¶7

Mr BG Saraf, for the Petitioner.
Mr US Upadhyay, AGP for Caveator and Applicant .
Mr Dayanand Jadhav, API, Kurla Police Station, is present.

¶8

CORAM: G.S. PATEL, J DATED: 10th July 2018

¶9

PC:-

¶10

1.It seems the Caveator, one Mohammed Yakub Emtiyaz
Ahmed Shaikh has filed a complaint against the Petitioner alleging
that the Will that is the subject matter of this Testamentary Petition
and Testamentary Suit is forged. This complainant, Mohammed
Yakub Emtiyaz Ahmed Shaikh has already filed a Caveat in this
Court.

¶11

2.I find it utterly extraordinary that an application comes to be
made by the State of Maharashtra through the Senior Inspector of

¶12

Page 1 of 2
10th July 2018

¶13

28-CST77-18.DOC

¶14

Police, Kurla Police Station requesting authenticated copy of the
Will in question. As part of this investigation, the Petitioner who is
nearly 75 years old, has been repeatedly summoned to the Kurla
Police Station. The Caveator will not use the State Government
machinery in this fashion. It is open to the Defendant/Caveator in
these very proceedings to obtain a forensic report as to the Will and
to lead this evidence in this Court. In fact, it is this Court that will
decide whether or not the Will is a forgery, since this is a case set up
in these proceedings. The Defendant is not entitled to present this
Court with a fait accompli by obtaining some ruling on forgery in
parallel criminal proceedings and then seeking to bind the hands of
this Court on a matter of evidence. It is one thing to seek a copy of
the Will or inspection of it for reference to an expert, or even to the
State Examiner of Documents, for an opinion. That expert opinion
will have to be tested in this Court. It is quite another thing to run a
parallel litigation on precisely the same issue that is raised before
this Court. This is nothing but an attempt to over-reach this Court.
The police does not have to be a party to this.

¶15

3.The Kurla Police will take appropriate note of the fact that
there is a civil dispute pertaining to this document raising the same
allegations of forgery and this dispute is pending before this Court.

¶16

4. The Chamber Summons is dismissed.

¶17

(G. S. PATEL, J)

¶18

Page 2 of 2
10th July 2018

Akhlaque Ahmed Mohammed v. State of Maharashtra (Applicant)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akhlaque Ahmed Mohammed v. State of Maharashtra (Applicant)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramnik Narayn Dodia and 33 Ors. Vs Shanti Sagar Realty India Pvt. Ltd. and 6 Ors.

Kalpataru Power Transmission Ltd. and Anr. Vs Utc Carriers

M/S Three Circles Vs U.P. Co-Op. Federation Ltd. and Nrb Bearings Ltd.

L and T Finance Ltd. Vs Badal Saha and Anr.

Dipti Mahesh Manek Vs Mahesh Khimji Manek

Essel Vision Productions Limited Vs White Hill Production India Private Limited and Anr.