IMPORTANT POINT
While exercising such inherent powers what is required to be examined is only prima facie existence of offence sought to be quashed.

JUDGMENT :

SANJAY KAROL, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. These appeals call into question the correctness of a common judgment and order dated 24th March 2022 passed by the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi, in W.P. (S) (Crl.) Nos. 02 of 2021 and 47 of 2021, by which the High Court quashed Giridih (T) P.S. Case No. 217 of 2020 @ FIR No. 04797769 dated 5th November, 2020, for the offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860¹ [IPC for short] pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih.

Brief Background

3. One Purushotam Kumar (A-1) forged a Power of Attorney² [PoA] on the basis of which transfer of certain land in favour of Bikash Kumar Singh, S/o Surendra Singh (A-2), Surendra Singh (A-3) with the latter witnessing the sale transaction stood registered with the Registrar having competent jurisdiction at a place known as Giridih. The original owner Naveen Kumar Rai, having learnt of such an illegal transaction instituted proceedings before a Civil Court seeking a declaration of the transaction to be null and void. Independently, the District Deputy Registrar, Giridih initiated an inquiry in terms of Circular No. 15/R (Miscellaneous) Public Applications-04/16³ [‘Circular’] dated Nil resulting in the passing of an order, prima facie holding A-1 to have forged the PoA impersonating Naveen Kumar Rai, leading to the execution of a sale deed which document also stood registered with the very same Authority. Resultantly, on the basis of such an inquiry both the documents i.e. the PoA and the sale deed stood cancelled. Further, on the basis of the communication dated 15th October, 2020 that of the District Deputy Registrar, Giridih, FIR bearing the above-noted particulars stood registered by Sahdeo Mehra, against seven accused persons including A-1, A-2 and A-3.

4. Assailing the said action of initiation of criminal proceedings, the accused persons preferred separate writ petitions titled Surendra Singh and Others vs. State of Jharkhand and Others and Purushotam Rai @ Purushotam Kumar Rai @ Purushotom Kumar Rai vs. State of Jharkhand and Others, which stood disposed of vide the judgment impugned before us.

5. A perusal of the impugned judgment shows the FIRs to have been quashed on the following counts:

(a) The original owner had already initiated civil proceedings.

(b) No act of “criminality” can be said to be “made out.”

(c) Initiation of criminal prosecution would amount to abuse of the process of Court (“perhaps meant as law”).

(d) The alleged action “appears” to be “a civil wrong” in relation to which “with respect to the same cause of action” the title suit is pending.

(e) For ready reference the operative portion of the judgment is extracted as under:

“.....However, in case, if it finds that the criminality is not made out and the criminal prosecution has been initiated, it will amount to an abuse of the process of Court. For the same cause of action and for cancellation of the sale deed as well as the power of attorney, the Title Suit has already been filed earlier by the intervener. It is well settled that any registered document can be annulled by way of filing the civil suit, which is not in the domain of the Deputy Commissioner to cancel the sale deed. Thus, it appears that for a civil wrong, the criminal case has been initiated against the petitioners and for the same cause of action, the title suit is pending.

In view of the above facts and reasoned analysis, the Giridih (T) P.S. Case No. 217 of 2020 for the alleged offence under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih, is hereby, quashed....”

6. In our considered view, the premise on which the Court proceeded in quashing the FIR is on the wrong assumption, interpretation, and application of the law.

7. It is argued before us that the Circular stands quashed vide Judgment dated 11th January, 2024 in W.P. (C) No. 3103 of 2020 titled as Vinod Shankar Jha @ Binod S