Anant Pal Singh, Lt.Col. vs Bharat Pal Singh

Harmohinder Kaur Sandhu, J.

Brief facts of the case necessary for the disposal of this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the complaint under Sections 463, 464 and 467 I.P.C. filed by the respondents against the petitioner, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Chandigarh, as given in the complaint, are that Shri Prithi Pal Singh, grandfather of the respondents, owned sufficient movable and immovable property, out of which he had transferred property to a great extent, situated in District Amritsar, and District, Lakhimpur Kheri (Uttar Pradesh) to his three sons, namely, late AVM Jaspal Singh, Sarab Pal Singh father of the respondents and Anant Pal Singh petitioner. He had great love and affection for the respondents who were his grandsons and he bequeathed rest of his property in their favour by executing a Will dated 7th February, 1991, which was duly attested by the witnesses and also by Shri R.P. Aggarwal, Advocate and Notary Public, Lakhimpur Kheri. In order to grab the ancestral property, the accused i.e. the present petitioner, fabricated a false and forged will dated February 2, 1991 of Shri Prithi Pal Singh and submitted that Will to Punjab and Sind Bank, Sector 17C, Chandigarh to obtain in the cash/F.D.R. lying deposited in the account of Shri Prithi Pal Singh. The Bank got suspicious and asked the petitioner to produce a succession certificate in response to his claim. Thereafter the petitioner fabricated another Will of Shri Prithi Pal Singh of the same date wherein he corporated the Bank accounts, deposits and presented the same before Municipal Committee, Lakhimpur Kheri for transfer of the property in his name. He also filed a suit on the basis of the Will. In fact Shri Prithi Pal Singh had not executed any Will on 2nd February, 1991 and by forging these Wills the petitioner committed offences under Sections 463, 464 and 467 I.P.C.

The petitioner pleaded that he had already instituted a suit in the Civil Court at Lakhimpur Kheri on the basis of the alleged Will dated 2.2.1991 against Bharatpal Singh and others which was pending in the Court of Civil Judge, Lakhimpur Kheri and an injunction had been granted in his favour. He had also filed an application for grant of succession certificate titled at Lt. col. Anant Pal Singh Versus Shri Sarab Pal Singh and another in which the respondents too had filed objections. So far no findings had been given by any Court that the Wills set up by the petitioner were forged and he was not even remotely connected with the offences as alleged in the complaint Annexure P/1. It was further averred that even if any finding is given by the Court : regarding the Wills being not genuine still no cognizance of the fabrication of the Will could be taken by the Court unless that Court files any complaint in writing to that effect. Filing of the complaint by the respondents, therefore, was a clear abuse of the process of the Court and the complaint was liable to be quashed in exercise of inherent powers of this Court.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the allegations in the complaint against the petitioner are that he had forged two Wills dated February 2, 1991 purporting to be executed by his father Shri Prithi Pal Singh. The question regarding genuineness of the Wills was pending for determination in a civil Court at Lakhimpur Kheri and unless the matter was decided by the Civil Court, continuation of proceedings in the complaint amounted to an abuse of the process of the Court. In fact this complaint was filed simply with a motive to harass the petitioner. It was urged on behalf of the respondents that civil and criminal remedies were not mutually exclusive but the same were coextensive and even if the civil suit was pending at Lakhimpur Kheri, there was no bar to the continuation of criminal proceedings Moreover, in the suit filed by the petitioner reference was only made to one Will executed by Shri Prithi Pal Singh on 2.2.1991 i.e. copy of which is Annexure P/4B and there was no reference in the suit with respect to Will copy of which was Annexure P/2. So, it could not be said that subject matter of criminal litigation was covered by the civil proceedings.

This fact is admitted in the complaint itself that a civil suit has been filed by the petitioner. The petitioner has attached copy of the plaint in that suit along with the petition, which is Annexure P/3. By means of this suit the petitioner claims himself to be the exclusive owner of Mandwa House, situated in Civil Lines, Lakhimpur Kheri on the basis of Will executed by his father on 2.2.1991. He alleged that his father was in a sound disposing mind at the time of execution of the Will. In this very plaint reference is made to the Will set up by the respondents dated 7.2.1991 alleged to have been executed by Prithi Pal Singh in their favour. The plaintiff averred that this Will was a false document and was not executed by Shri Prithi Pal Singh who suffered a severe heartattack accompanied with paralysis of right hand and right leg on February 5, 1991 and was brought to P.G.I. Chandigarh for better treatment. It is apparent that in this suit the question whether the Will dated February 2, 1991 or that of February 7, 1991 was genuine will be decided. As regards the second Will the petitioner has moved an application for grant of succession certificate on the basis of the same and the respondents have appeared in that case and had raised objections. So Civil Court is also seized of the matter regarding genuineness of the other Will. When the same controversy is pending before the Civil Court and also before a Criminal Court, the findings of the Civil Court are binding on the Criminal Court and as such it will be proper to stay further proceedings in the complaint till the matter regarding genuineness of the Wills is finally settled by the Civil Court. Similar view was expressed in the case of Mala Ram v. Hawa Singh, 1991(2) C.C. Cases 473. In case the Civil Court finds that the Wills set up by the petitioner were genuine documents executed by Shri Prithi Pal Singh deceased, then the very basis of the complaint will go and the petitioner will be saved unnecessary harassment.

As a result I partly accept this petition and stay further proceedings in the complaint Annexure P/1 Shri Bharat Pal Singh v. Shri Anant Pal Singh till the final disposal of the Civil Suit pending between the parties.