Manju Sharma & Others V. State Of Madhya Pradesh & Another

Heard.

This petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking quashment of Crime No.633/2016 registered at Police Station Janakganj, District

Gwalior under Sections 420, 34 of IPC.

It is admitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that there is no dispute about the sale deed, which was made by Rameshwar Dayal Sharma in

favour of respondent no.2 in the year 2003, a copy of which has been enclosed alongwith this petition as Annexure P/3.

It is submitted that the dispute is only in regard to open land of about 1200 sq.ft., which was not part of the sale deed Annexure P/3 and in regard to

which the complainant is claiming to have a Will in favour of her husband, whereas another Will has been executed after the said Will in the year 2014

Annexure P/7 cancelling the earlier Will executed in favour of the husband of the complainant and bequeathing the open land in favour of petitioner

no.1. Thus, the dispute is to the validity and authenticity of the Will Annexure P/7 as well as the Will which was executed in favour of the husband of

the complainant.

It is submitted that since this dispute is in the domain of civil dispute and it has to be determined by the competent Court that which Will is valid and

will have the force, the criminal proceedings are not maintainable.Â

On the other hand, Shri Vikas Saxena submits that the dispute is not only in regard to open land, but the petitioners are also claiming their share in the

house, which was admittedly sold by the father of petitioner no.1 in the year 2003. It is also submitted that in fact a forged Will has been made by

petitioner no.1 with a view to defeat the Will, which was executed by her father Rameshwar Dayal Sharma in favour of the husband of the

complainant. He has placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vijender Kumar & Others v. State of Rajasthan

and another as reported in (2014) 3 SCC 389, wherein it has been held that a given set of facts may make out a civil wrong as also a criminal offence

and only because a civil remedy may also be available to informant/complainant, that itself cannot be a ground to quash a criminal proceedings. Real

test is whether allegations in complaint disclose a criminal offence or not.

In view of such facts, FIR, which was lodged by complainant-respondent no.2 needs to be examined. Such FIR has been enclosed by the petitioner as

Annexure P/1, which is dated 24.08.2016. It is mentioned that the date of occurrence of the crime is between 17.11.2014 and 08.08.2016.

As per the FIR, the allegation is that a forged Will has been created to misappropriate registered house. It is further mentioned that the complainant

had purchased a building at Gende Wali Sadak, Lashkar, Gwalior, from its owner Rameshwar Dayal Sharma son of Mool Chand Sharma vide sale

deed dated 07.11.2003. Thereafter, on the basis of such sale deed, mutation of the house, which was purchased by the complainant, was obtained

from the Municipal Corporation and in the form of witnesses to the sale deed, signatures of Vijay Kumar Jha son of Rameshwar Dayal Jha were

obtained. After death of Rameshwar Dayal Sharma, his daughter Manju Sharma wife of Shri S.K. Jha, resident of Anand Nagar, Bahodapur, Gwalior

has prepared a forged Will, in which it is mentioned that the Will has been executed even in regard to the house, which has been sold earlier in the

name of the complainant. It is also mentioned that Manju Sharma had made a false complaint before S.P. in Jansunwai on 15.03.2016, in which

investigation was carried out by Police Station Janakganj, and FR was issued. When the Police failed to take any action on such false complaint, then

on 03.04.2016 Manju Sharma had forcibly entered into house of the complainant and abused her daughterin-law and threatened them to vacate the

house. It is mentioned that the complaint, in regard to such act of Manju Sharma, was handed over to the Police Station Janakganj, but no action was

taken on such complaint and again on 07.04.2016, Manju Sharma alongwith her husband Shri S. K. Sharma and brother Vinod had reached to her

house and threatened her tenant Rinku Jatav to vacate the house and had beaten him. It is submitted that he had made a complaint to the Police

Station Janakganj, Gwalior, on which the Police had Registered a case under Sections 323 and 506/34 of IPC. It is further mentioned that Maju

Sharma and her husband through her goons are continuously threatening them to get the house vacated and to face the consequences in case the

house is not vacated. It is mentioned that the complainant is a widow lady and is meeting her ends by obtaining rent from the property and if Manju

Sharma and her husband Shri S.K. Jha and brothers Vinod and Vijay are allowed to prepare a forged Will and corner a house on the strength of such

forged Will, then she will face severe consequences. It is further alleged that they are seeking money by blackmailing her.

As has been noted above, this report was lodged on 24.08.2016. It is mentioned in column no.3-B that information was received at the Police Station

on 24.08.2016, whereas in the FIR, three different instances have been narrated; first on 15.03.2016, second on 03.04.2016 and third one on

07.04.2016. There has been delay in lodging the FIR. The allegation is in regard to preparation of a forged Will and, therefore, the case has been

registered under Section 420/34 of IPC. There is no crime registered for allegedly blackmailing or threatening the complainant or her tenant.

In view of such facts, the ratio of the judgment rendered in the case of Vijender Kumar & Others (supra) is to be examined.

It is apparent that though the bundle of facts giving different dates of incidence have been narrated in the FIR, but the FIR is in regard to preparation

of a forged Will by Manju Sharma after death of her father, who had already executed a sale deed in favour of the complainant.

In view of the fact that the learned counsel for the petitioners has given an undertaking and it is also apparent from the statements recorded by the

wife of the deceased seller Rameshwar Dayal that there is no dispute in regard to the sale deed, which was executed in favour of the complainant, but

the dispute is in regard to about 1200 sq.ft. of open land, which was not the subject-matter of the sale deed and which according to the petitioners was

never bequeathed in favour of the complainant or her husband, it is purely a civil dispute inasmuch as only civil Court can decide as to which of the

Will is genuine and authentic and which of the Will will have the force of law and can be executed by the concerned party.

In view of such facts, though the complainant has tried to make out a case of criminal dimension but such case is not made out and this being a purely

case of civil nature having no criminal connotation, petition is allowed. FIR registered at Crime No.633/16 for the offences under Section 420, 34 of

IPC at Police Station Janakganj, District Gwalior is quashed. However, parties will be at liberty to approach the Civil Court in regard to adjudication of

genuineness of the Will.

Certified copy as per rules.