Amrik Singh vs State of Haryana

Harmohinder Kaur Sandhu, J.

Amrik Singh has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing first information report No. 154 dated 14.5.88 under Sections 468, 471, 467 and 420 IPC registered at Police Station, Sadar, Karnal and report under Section 173 CrPC as well as subsequent proceedings arising therefrom.

The above referred case was registered against the petitioner and Kartar Singh, Jagat Singh his maternal uncle and his sister Mohinder Pal Kaur at the instance of Ajit Singh brother of the petitioner, who made a complaint in the Court alleging that his father owned landed property and although he resided in Bangkok since 1962 his father had no intention to deprive him of his due share in the property. After the death of his father the petitioner and his coaccused in order to deprive him of the property owned by his father forged a will dated 5.1.1972. It also purported to be signed by him although at that relevant time he was in Bangkok. The Will was executed in favour of Amrik Kaur mother and Mohinder Pal Sister of the petitioner with a view to get the property from them subsequently. This forged Will was produced before Tehsildar, Karnal at Jundla where the petitioner and other accused stated that the Will was genuine. In a civil suit the said Will had been set aside and was not found to be availed Will.

The petitioner alleged that in the year 1985 the complainant filed a civil suit challenging the validity of the Will. The allegations in the Civil suit were that Will was obtained by his mother and sister fraudulently, by exercising undue influence on the testator and that it did not bear the signatures of the complainant. A compromise was effected in the civil suit and the Will was declared null and void vide judgment dated 22.4.1988 copy of which was Annexure P/2. Since the matter had been adjudicated by the civil Court where there was no plea of any forgery against any one the criminal proceedings were liable to be quashed.

In the return filed by the respondent it was alleged that on. the basis of the Will mutation was sanctioned in the names of Amrit Kaur and Mohinder Pal Narula but the Will was a forged document. Although signatures of the complainant were found on the Will but during investigation it was revealed that his signatures were obtained on a blank paper on which the Will was forged.

The only question to be decided in this case is whether Ajit Singhcomplainant could allege that the Will in question was forged document, after he had refrained from doing so when he claimed joint possession of the property and sought declaration that the will in question was null and void, without making any allegation that it was forged by any of the accused now named in the first information report, Copy of the plaint in the civil suit is Annexure P/1. This suit was filed by Ajit Singh complainant against Amrik Singh petitioner. Amrit Kaur and Mohinder Pal Kaur mother and sister of the complainant. In this plaint there was absolutely no allegation against the petitioner regarding the Will having been forged by him in order to obtain whole of the property left by his father. The Will in fact was executed in favour of Amrit Kaur and Mohinder Pal Kaur and it was attested by the complainant as well as by the petitioner. Even the report from Forensic Science Laboratory shows that the Will was signed by the complainant. The averments made in paras No. 3 and 5 of the complaint show that only grievance of the complainant was that Will in question was not a voluntary disposition of the property by the deceased Shri Gurbachan Singh but it was obtained by the mother and sister of the complainant by practising fraud and exercising undue influence. If the complainant was of the view that the Will had been forged then he should have made those averments in the plaint and the parties should have joined issues on that matter. Copy of the judgment Annexure P/2 shows that in the suit the complainant nowhere took a plea that the Will had been forged by Amrik Singh petitioner or anybody else. On the basis of admission made by the defendants in the suit the suit of the plaintiff was decreed and Will was declared null and void. The judgment of the civil court to the effect that no allegation was ever made regarding the Will being a forged document is now binding on the parties and after obtaining relief in the suit the complainant cannot be allowed to assert that the Will was a forged document, more so, when the Handwriting Expert found that the Will was also signed by him. These proceedings were initiated simply to harass the petitioner and amounted to an abuse of the process of the Court.

As a result I allow this petition, quash FIR No. 154 dated 14.5.1988 Annexure P/4, report under Section 173 CrPC Annexure P/5 and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom qua the petitioner.