1. - By this criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., a challenge is made to the FIR No.298/2001, registered with Police Station Gandhi Nagar, Jaipur for the offence under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC.

2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that a 'Will' was executed by Achraj Devi in favour of Ram Prasad and on his death, to Smt. Shimla Devi. The petitioner along with Madan Lal were the witnesses to the Will. The allegation exists regarding creation of fraudulent Will to grab the property of Smt. Achraj Devi. It is alleged that on the death of Ram Prasad, the property had come to Smt. Shimla Devi. The petitioner was only a witness to the Will and in no manner a beneficiary in the property. No proceedings were initiated against other witness Madan Lal. In view of the above, the FIR registered against him deserve to be set aside. It is more so when a civil suit for the property and for cancellation of the Will is pending in the Civil Court. The remedy having availed before the Civil Court and looking to the nature of the case and the role assigned to the petitioner, the FIR registered against him deserves to be quashed.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer. He submits that the petitioner being a witness, contributed in creation of the forged Will, thus, a case has rightly been registered against him. In view of the above, the FIR may not be quashed.

4. I have considered the rival submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

5. It is not in dispute that allegation of creation of fraudulent Will of Smt. Achraj Devi exists but petitioner is not the beneficiary out of the Will. He along with Madan Lal were the witnesses to the Will, alleged to be forged. A civil suit between the parties exists, which includes even a suit for cancellation of the Will.

6. In view of the above and as role assigned to the petitioner is limited as witness to the alleged forged Will and is not as beneficiary, the FIR bearing No.298/2001, registered with Police Station Gandhi Nagar, Jaipur, deserves to be quashed, qua the petitioner. By the interim order, further proceedings qua the petitioner were stayed by this Court, though it was clarified that proceedings may continue against other accused. It is clarified that quashing of the FIR qua the petitioner would not affect the proceedings against other accused.

7. With the aforesaid, the misc. petition stands disposed of.

*******