The court held that allegations of forgery and cheating in the FIR do not have a predominantly civil profile and are not barred under Section 195(1)(b)(i) of Cr.P.C., thus the FIR cannot be quashed.

JUDGMENT :

M.S. Sonak, J. - Heard Mr. Dhaval Zaveri with Mr. Nehal Govekar for the petitioner, Mr. Shailendra G. Bhobe, Public Prosecutor for the State and Mr. Allan F. C. Andrade and Mr. Mark Valadares h/f Mr. Richard Almeida for respondent no.3.

2. Rule. The Rule is made returnable immediately at the request of and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.

3. This petition seeks quashing of FIR No.178/2023 dated 11.09.2023 registered at the Mapusa Police Station (impugned FIR) inter alia on the following grounds:-

i) That the allegations have predominantly a civil profile and, therefore, the very lodging of the FIR amounts to an abuse of process;

ii) The impugned FIR alleges the forging of some documents by unknown persons, yet the petitioner is sought to be prosecuted for such forgery by invoking Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). This, according to the petitioner, is impermissible in law and amounts to an abuse of process;

iii) From the allegations in the complaint, on a demurrer, offences punishable under Sections 193 to 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) (both inclusive) in relation to proceedings before the Revenue Court are made out. Therefore, in terms of Section 195(1)(b)(i) of Cr.P.C., no Court is empowered to take cognisance of such offences except on the complaint in writing of that Court. The impugned FIR seeks to circumvent this embargo under Section 195(1)(b)(i) of Cr.P.C. Accordingly, the impugned FIR deserves to be quashed given the law laid down in paragraph 102 (6) of State of Haryana and Ors. v. Bhajan Lal and Ors. - 1992 Supp (1) SC 335.

4. The impugned FIR alleges the following:-

"On the date, time, place mentioned as above, the above mentioned accused Persons intentionally impersonated the Mr. Jose Miranda @ Joseph Miranda who expired on 25.04.1977 and by forging the signature of Mr. Jose Miranda @ Joseph Miranda on Power of Attorney which is executed on 22.01.2007 in respected of landed property bearing survey No. 71/1 of Village Anjuna, Bardez, Goa admeasuring 10.550 Sq.Mts. and thereafter all accused Persons with their common intention knowingly used, produced the forged document as genuine before the concern authorities to facilitate the documentary transaction of landed property bearing survey No. 71/1 of Village Anjuna, Bardez, Goa and succeeded in transferring the rights of landed property thereby deprived the complainant from enjoying the rights over the landed property and cheated the complainant.

Hence Offence Under Section 419, 464, 465, 467, 468, 471, 420 R/W 34 IPC stands registered.

(Detail Complaint Attached)"

5. The main allegation is about the forgery of the signature of one Mr. Jose Miranda @ Joseph Miranda, who had admittedly expired on 25.04.1977 on a power of attorney allegedly executed on 22.01.2007 concerning landed property admeasuring 10,550 sq. mtrs., surveyed under No.71/1 of Village Anjuna, Bardez, Goa and using this forged document as genuine before the concerned authorities to facilitate the transfer of this property to the Petitioner. The forged power of attorney purported to confer powers from the dead person, Mr. Jose Miranda, to the petitioner's sister. Based on this forged and fabricated document, this sister transferred the said property to the petitioner herein. Hence, the impugned FIR alleges the commission of an offence under Sections 419, 464, 465, 467, 468, 471, 420 r/w 34 of IPC not only against the petitioner but others involved in this prima facie fraudulent transaction by invoking Section 34 of IPC.

6. When considering a petition for quashing of an FIR, allegations made in the impugned FIR must be taken at their face value and accepted. It is only if such allegations, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety, do not prima facie constitute any offence which makes out any case against the accused that the impugned FIR can be quashed.

7. Now admittedly, Mr. Jose Miranda @ Joseph Miranda had expired on 25.