Naveen Kumar And Another vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others

Ravindra Maithani, J

The petitioners- Naveen Kumar and Usha Singh Tejayan seek quashing of Case Crime No.723 of 2023, under Sections 120-B, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Gangnahar, District Haridwar, with related reliefs.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

According to the FIR, the father of the informant died on 02.05.2021. Despite that, the petitioner, Naveen Kumar, got prepared a forged death certificate dated 10.09.2021 of his father and withdrew two months pension and other amount. The FIR records that, in fact, both the petitioners gave a joint application to the Treasury, Roorkee, for that purpose. There are other averments as well in the FIR.

Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the amount, which was withdrawn pertains to the period falling prior to the death of the father of the informant; no forgery was committed. It is also submitted that the petitioner no.2 is the nominee of the deceased .

It is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In case, the FIR discloses commission of offence, generally, no interference is warranted unless there are compelling circumstances to do so.

The informant and the petitioner no.1 both are brothers. What is alleged is that knowing that the death of the father of the informant took place on 02.05.2021, petitioner no.1 got prepared a forged death certificate dated 10.09.2021, from the Nagar Nigam. The FIR further records that both the petitioners gave joint application to the Treasury, Roorkee, for withdrawing the money.

The FIR definitely discloses commission of offence. It requires investigation. This Court cannot conduct a mini trial, at this stage. Therefore, this Court is of the view that there is no reason to make any interference, at this stage. The petition deserves to be dismissed, at the stage of admission itself.

The petition is dismissed in limine.