DIVYESH A. JOSHI
Kantilal Maganlal Shah – Appellant
Versus
State of Gujarat – Respondent
JUDGMENT (CAV)
At the outset, learned advocate Mr. Parthiv B. Shah submits that during the pendency of the present proceedings, the applicant No.1-Kantilal Maganlal Shah has passed away and, therefore, he does not press this application and seeks permission to withdraw the same qua the applicant No.1. Accordingly, the present application is disposed of as withdrawn qua the applicant No.1- Kantilal Maganlal Shah.
2. By this application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant seek to invoke the inherent powers of this Court praying for quashing of the first information report being Criminal Inquiry Case No.05 of 2014 which is now registered as M.Case No.01 of 2014 before the Jetpur Police Station, Vadodara Rural for the offence punishable under sections 465, 467, 471, 406, 420 and 114 of the IPC.
3. The factual matrix of the case, in a nutshell, is that the dispute involved in the present case is with regard to the ancestral property of the complainant and the applicant. The complainant happens to be the sister of the applicant. It is alleged by the complainant the applicant, with a view to deprive her right as well as the rights of the legal heirs of
Lal Muni Devi (Smt.) vs. State of Bihar
Mere pendency of suit cannot be made a ground for quashing criminal proceedings – Entire prosecution story could not be disbelieved on the ground of delay.
The mere existence of a civil dispute does not bar criminal proceedings where allegations disclose crimes, and the delay in filing a complaint does not negate the need for investigation.
The court established that allegations of forgery and cheating can coexist with civil disputes, allowing for criminal proceedings to continue.
Criminal proceedings cannot be pursued when the validity of the document in question is already under adjudication in a civil court, to prevent abuse of the judicial process.
The court emphasized the need for custodial interrogation based on prima facie evidence of forgery, and highlighted the balance between personal liberty and societal interest in granting anticipatory....
The existence of civil proceedings does not bar criminal prosecution for allegations of forgery, as distinct standards apply to criminal and civil liability.
The court affirmed that civil disputes do not preclude the initiation of criminal proceedings based on allegations of forgery and that both can arise from the same facts independently.
The court emphasized that speculative allegations without substantial evidence cannot sustain criminal proceedings, and individuals possess the right to manage their property affairs without undue in....
The need for prima facie evidence and the expediency in the interests of justice before initiating proceedings under Section 340 CrPC.
The court established that civil disputes can coexist with criminal allegations, and the merits of such allegations must be determined through trial, not preemptively dismissed.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.