G.P. MITTAL, J.

1. The Petitioner (Adarsh Kaur Gill) invokes inherent powers of the Court for quashing of FIR No.269/2001 dated 26.11.2001 registered in Police Station Tughlaq Road whereby the Petitioner is sought to be prosecuted under Sections 406/467 IPC.

2. Before adverting to the contentions raised on behalf of the parties, it would be appropriate to have an insight into the factual matrix which led to the filing of the FIR. Plot No.8A, Block No.11, now known as 3, Southend Road, New Delhi was leased out to R.B.S. Basakha Singh vide a lease deed executed on 21.10.1941. He transferred the perpetual leasehold rights in respect of the earlier said property in favour of Smt. Abnash Kaur by a sale deed dated 18.01.1956. Smt. Abnash Kaur died in New Delhi on 10.06.1976. During her life time, she made a Will dated 06.02.1973 whereby she bequeathed 1/6th share in the earlier said property in favour of her son Kanwar Kishore Bindal(K.K.Bindal), brother Ajit Singh, her sisters Adarsh Kaur Gill, Surjit Kaur Gill, her niece Noorien Kaur Gill and her nephew Gurnir Singh Gill. Execution of the Will is not in dispute. Ajit Singh on the strength of the registered Will filed a Civil Suit No.2167/93 (in the year 1993) on the original side of Delhi High Court for partition and rendition of accounts, etc. etc. impleading remaining five beneficiaries including K.K. Bindal. A prayer was made in the said Suit for partition of the property by metes and bounds and by putting each of the party in actual physical possession of the share of his/her property. It was prayed that if partition of the property was not possible by metes and bounds, the same might be sold by public auction through the Court. The said Civil Suit was contested by Adarsh Kaur Gill(the Petitioner herein) who was also claiming herself to be a tenant in the property since the life time of its owner Abnash Kaur.

3. K.K. Bindal expired on 15.12.1995. The Delhi High Court by its order dated 12.07.2000 directed the legal representatives (LRs) of K.K. Bindal to be brought on record. On 12.10.2000, Ajit Singh expired and as per his Will dated 21.07.1997, his share was to be succeeded by Mrs. Surjit Kaur Gill(the Respondent No.3). She(Surjit Kaur Gill) was also appointed as administrator and executor of his(Ajit Singh’s) estate in the property mentioned earlier. By an order dated 04.12.2000, the Delhi High Court substituted Mrs. Surjit Kaur Gill in place of Ajit Singh as the Plaintiff.

4. Sometime in the year 2001, Respondent No.2 along with some of the co-owners wanted to sell their undivided share in the property. For the said purpose, the Respondent No.2 and others applied to appropriate authority(Income Tax) in Form No.37-I to seek its no objection. It is alleged that at this stage(it is not even disputed by the Petitioner) the registered agreements to sell dated 08.04.1993 alleged to have been executed by late K.K. Bindal(in respect of 1/6th share) in favour of Noorien Kaur Gill, Adarsh Kaur Gill and NIDAS Estate Pvt. Ltd. was produced by the Petitioner before the appropriate authority(Income Tax) whereby K.K. Bindal’s 1/6th undivided share was sought to be transferred in favour of earlier said three persons for a sale consideration of `9 lakhs each.

5. A complaint was lodged by the Respondent No.2 for herself as well as being the General Attorney of Surjit Kaur Gill stating that the registered agreements to sell dated 08.04.1993 were never produced by the Petitioner (herein) in the Civil Suit pending before the Delhi High Court and that the agreements to sell were forged by the Petitioner to cheat and defeat the valuable right of Respondent No.2 and other persons. After prolonged investigation, a report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was presented. During the course of investigation, it was found that two cheques for `15,000/- each (out of sale consideration of `9 Lakhs each) were issued from the account of Ms. Malvika Rajkotia who was an att