This criminal miscellaneous petition challenged the quashing of an FIR for offences under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC regarding a disputed agricultural land will. The court quashed proceedings as a gross abuse of process.
All further proceedings in relation to FIR No.123/2014 are quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 572 / 2017
----Petitioners
Versus
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. R.K. Charan.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. O.P. Rathi, PP.
Mr. Rajendra Singh Shekhawat.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA Judgment
21/08/2017
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel representing the complainant.
By way of this criminal misc. petition, the petitioners herein have approached this Court seeking quashing of the FIR No.123/2014 registered at the Police Station Karoi, District Bhilwara for the offences under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC and all subsequent proceedings sought to be taken thereunder. It is further stated in the petition that the investigating officer submitted a detailed final report in the matter
(2 of 5)
[CRLMP-572/2017]
whereafter, the Magistrate has unjustifiably directed further investigation and the examination of the disputed will through the Forensic Science Laboratory and the petitioners crave relief of quashing that direction as well.
The dispute revolves around certain chunks of agricultural land owned by late Shri Shiv Singh and his wife Smt. Fateh Kanwar in the village Karoi, District Bhilwara. After the death of Shri Shiv Singh, lands owned by him were bequeathed to his three sons namely Raghuram Singh, Sangram Singh and Narayan Singh. Smt. Fateh Kanwar also owned certain pieces of land in the village Karoi for which she is alleged to have executed a will dated 22.05.1989 in favour of her daughter-in-law Smt. Hem Kanwar. The will purportedly bears the signatures of Shiv Singh, Raghuram Singh and Narayan Singh. After death of Smt. Fateh Kanwar, an application was moved by her sons Raghuram Singh and Sangram Singh on 21.07.1990 in the court of SDO, Bhilwara for transferring the land owned by Smt. Fateh Kanwar to Smt. Hem Kanwar wife of Sangram Singh by way of execution of the said will. Acting on the said application, the learned SDO directed that the lands owned by late Smt. Fateh Kanwar be transferred to the petitioners herein being the sons of Smt. Hem Kanwar because she passed away in the meantime. Raghuram Singh challenged the order passed by the learned SDO by filing an appeal in the Revenue Appellate Authority which was rejected on 11.07.2013 and the matter was carried further to the Board of Revenue by filing an appeal which too was rejected by order dated 11.09.2015. In the said order, the Board of Revenue clearly observed that the
(3 of 5)
[CRLMP-572/2017]
mutation application was submitted by Raghuram Singh himself with a prayer to open the mutation in name of Smt. Hem Kanwar on the basis of will executed by Smt. Fateh Kanwar and as such, no attestation of the will was required. The Board of Revenue further observed that it was inconceivable that the application was filed under the forged signatures of Raghuram Singh. It was further observed that the execution of the will was carried out with consent of all the concerned parties and thus, the order passed by the learned Revenue Appellate Authority rejecting the appeal of Raghuram was upheld. Not only this, the Board also observed that the will could not be doubted because no attempt was made to get the signatures of Smt. Fateh Kanwar compared during her lifetime. Further the will also bore the signatures of Narayan Singh and Raghuram Singh who never took any steps for questioning the will in any civil court during the lifetime of Smt. Fateh Kanwar and even thereafter.
Be that as it may. Having failed to upturn the execution of the will in revenue courts, Raghuram Singh lodged a complaint against the petitioners herein for the offences under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC which was forwarded to the SHO, Police Station Karoi for investigation where, FIR No.123/2014 was registered and investigation commenced. The investigating officer collected various documents including the orders passed by the revenue courts and also recorded the statement of Shri Bhanwar Singh the scribe of the disputed will who verified the factum of the execution of the will by Smt. Fateh Kanwar. Accordingly, a detailed final report was submitted in the
(4 of 5)
[CRLMP-572/2017]
court concerned upon finally the allegations of the complainant unsubstantiated.
The respondent herein, filed a protest petition in the trial court wherein, it was averred that the signatures of Smt. Fateh Kanwar on the disputed will were got compared through a private handwriting expert who gave an opinion regarding the signatures being forged and as such, a prayer was made that the original will be directed to be recovered and got compared through the Forensic Science Laboratory. The learned Magistrate, passed an order dated 27.01.2016 and directed that the will be recovered and got compared from the Forensic Science Laboratory.
On a perusal of the case diary submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor, it is clear that despite all efforts made by the investigating officer during further investigation, the original will could not be traced out. It was observed by the I.O. that since Smt. Fateh Kanwar, the executant of the will and Smt. Hem Kanwar, the beneficiary had passed away way back, it was not possible to locate the will. It is very significant and relevant to mention here that the petitioners herein are sons of Late Shri Sangram Singh and Smt. Hem Kanwar in whose favour the will was executed. Admittedly, the petitioners had no part to play in the preparation or execution of the will. The complainant respondent has pertinently filed the complaint against the petitioners herein with allegations of fraud and forgery despite being aware of the fact, the petitioners had no part to play in the preparation of the will and the execution thereof. As a matter of fact, the will was got executed through the application submitted
(5 of 5)
[CRLMP-572/2017]
under the signatures of Shri Raghuram Singh and Sangram Singh in the court of SDO, Bhilwara way back on 21.07.1990.
In view of the above discussion, apparently the complainant acted in a malafide and vindictive manner and while trying to persecute the petitioners for oblique motives. Even if the highest allegations of the complainant are accepted for a moment, apparently the petitioners cannot be held responsible for either forgery or using the willed by Smt. Fateh Kanwar to Smt. Hem Kanwar knowing it to be forged because neither are they the signatories to the same nor the direct beneficiaries thereunder. They received the properties under the disputed will by inheritance as the sole beneficiary i.e. Smt. Hem Kanwar their mother passed away.
In view of the discussion made herein above, I am of the firm opinion that allowing further proceedings to be undertaken in relation to impugned FIR amounts to a gross abuse of process of law.
Consequently, the instant misc. petition deserves to be and is hereby allowed and all further proceedings being undertaken in relation to FIR No.123/2014 registered at Police Station Karoi, District Bhilwara are hereby quashed as tantamounting to gross abuse of process of law.
(SANDEEP MEHTA)J.
Tikam/119
2 issues framed by the court
Whether proceedings under an FIR for forgery and cheating based on a disputed will constitute a gross abuse of the process of law when petitioners inherited under the will.
Whether directions for forensic examination of a deceased executant's will amount to abuse of process when the will could not be traced and petitioners were not beneficiaries.
Shakti Singh S/o Late Shri Sangram Singh Rajput
Sudarshan Singh S/o Late Shri Sangarm Singh Rajput
Natraj Singh S/o Late Shri Sangarm Singh Rajput
State of Rajasthan
Raghuram Singh Rajput
Sandeep Mehta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
