Dev Narain Paswan Vs the State of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

¶1

$~17

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- TEST.CAS. 24/2023

¶4

DEV NARAIN PASWAN .....Petitioner Through: None.

¶5

versus

¶6

THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Pavitra Kaur and Ms. Shreya Mishra, Advocate for State. Ms. Amita Gupta, Advocate for R-3 and R-4.

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL

¶8

O R D E R % 10.10.2025

¶9

The present petition has been filed under Section 276 read with Section 278 of the India Succession Act, 1925 for grant of probate and letters of administration in respect of the Will dated 24^th July, 2012 executed by Late Smt. Purnima Bhattacharya.

¶10

In the order passed by this Court on 4^th November, 2024, it was recorded that the petitioner shall file the original Will dated 24^th July, 2012 within one week.

¶11

Subsequent orders passed in the petition show that the original Will has not been filed by the petitioner. Ultimately, on 15^th May, 2025, the following observations were made by this Court:

¶12

“12. The Petitioner was merely a caretaker of the Testatrix and propounding of this Will, which excludes the natural heirs and bequeaths the entire suit property to the caretaker is even otherwise an unnatural request. The role played by Mr. Rahul Gupta and Mr. Ankur Arora in the filing of this petition is also writ large.

¶13

Page 1 of 3

¶14

TEST.CAS. 24/2023

¶15

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 16/10/2025 at 14:23:26

¶16

13. The matter has been listed several times since 04.11.2024 for production of the original Will and the Petition and Mr. Jay Bhardwaj has been passing the buck.

¶17

14. In view of the contradictory statements being made by the Petitioner, his son Mr. Ranjeet Paswan and Mr. Jay Bhardwaj, Advocate with respect to the existence and the custody of the original Will; it is apparent to this Court that neither of the parties are stating the facts truthfully.

¶18

15. In these facts, this Court is of the prima facie opinion that the Will dated 24.07.2012 is not a genuine document and an attempt has been made by the Petitioner along with its Advocate to mislead this Court to believe with respect to the existence of this original document.

¶19

16. In the facts of this case since the original Will has admittedly not been deposited with this Court, the act of forgery has not happened during custodia legis and therefore the bar under Section 215 (l)(b)(ii) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ('BNSS') is not attracted. Therefore, for this forgery committed outside the Court, a criminal complaint before the police is maintainable.

¶20

17. Accordingly, the Registrar General of this Court is directed to lodge an FIR through the concerned Police Station under appropriate provisions of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 ('BNS') including under Section 318(2), 336, 338, 340(1), 340(2) of BNS and any other Section, which the Registrar General finds appropriate against the Petitioner. In this complaint the police will specifically examine the role played by Mr. Jay Bhardwaj, Advocate; Mr. Rahul Gupta and Mr. Ankur Arora as well as Mr. Ranjeet Paswan. The Registrar General is directed to take steps forthwith.”

¶21

[emphasis supplied]

¶22

Subsequently, an application, being I.A. 14734/2025, was filed on behalf of Mr. Ankur Arora and Mr. Rahul Gupta, who entered into an Agreement to Sell dated 2^nd April, 2023 with the petitioner seeking recall/ modification/ clarification of the aforesaid order dated 15^th May, 2025. However, I.A. 14734/2025 was dismissed as withdrawn on 17^th September, 2025.

¶23

None has been appearing on behalf of the petitioner after the order was passed by this Court on 15^th May, 2025, nor has the original Will been

¶24

Page 2 of 3

¶25

TEST.CAS. 24/2023

¶26

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 16/10/2025 at 14:23:26

¶27

place on record till date.

¶28

From the aforesaid narration, it is clear that the petitioner does not have the original Will dated 24^th July, 2012 in his possession.

¶29

In these circumstances, the present petition is dismissed.

¶30

AMIT BANSAL, J

¶31

OCTOBER 10, 2025 Vivek/-

¶32

Page 3 of 3

¶33

TEST.CAS. 24/2023

¶34

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 16/10/2025 at 14:23:26

Dev Narain Paswan v. the State of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dev Narain Paswan v. the State of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vijay Nirman Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India

M/S Shri Ram Singh Hospital and Heart Institute Vs the Medical Superintendent Ig Esi, Hospital & Ors.

Abhiyan Capital (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs Hemlata and Anr.

M/S. M2K Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. through Its Authorised Representative and Anr. Vs North Delhi Metro Mall Pvt. Ltd. (Earlier Known as Mgf Metro Mall Pvt. Ltd.) and Anr.

Mr. Neeraj Gupta Vs Mr. Harish Kumar & Anr.

Santosh Rani (through Gpa Holder) Rajeev Sethi Vs Chand Bibi Aggarwal Dharmarth Trust