The court emphasized that without a false document, the offenses of forgery and cheating are not substantiated, leading to the quashing of the FIR.

JUDGMENT :

ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.

Heard the parties.

2. This Writ Petition Criminal has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the prayer for issuance of an appropriate writ(s) / direction(s) for quashing the entire criminal proceedings including the First Information Report being Bistupur P.S. case no. 199 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Section 420 , 468, 471, 506, 34 of the IPC.

3. The allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioner no. 1 being the wife, of the brother of the informant and the petitioner no. 2 and 3 being the brothers, of the informant have entered into an agreement with one Jaspal Singh in respect of 3/5th property out of joint property, without including the informant and his brother- Subroto Ghosh, as a party. It next submitted that the allegation against the petitioners is false. It is next submitted that the allegation of criminal intimidation is against the co- accused – Jaspal Singh, who is not the petitioner before this Court and there is no allegation against the petitioners of having committed any offence punishable in law. It is next submitted that even if the entire allegations against the petitioners are considered to be true, still none of the offences for which the FIR has been registered, is made out against the petitioners. It is therefore, submitted that the prayer as made in this writ petition be allowed.

4. Learned counsel for the State submits that the allegation against the petitioners is of creating a false document which amounts to forgery. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 5 submits that the petitioners have committed cheating, hence, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the State and the learned counsel for the respondent no. 5 that this Writ Petition being without any merit be dismissed.

5. Having heard the submission made at the Bar and after going through the materials available in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that so far as the offence of forgery is concerned, the sine qua non for the said offence is creation of a false document and the only allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners have entered into an agreement with Jaspal Singh with respect of 3/5th property of the joint family property. Admittedly, the informant and his brother Subroto Ghosh have not been made party to this agreement and admittedly, their signature does not appear in the said agreement and the undisputed fact remains that the petitioners have not impersonated for someone else while entering into an agreement.

6. Under such circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that even if the entire allegations against the petitioners are considered to be true in their entirety, still the offence of forgery is not made out against the petitioners in the absence of false document.

7. So far as the offence of cheating is concerned, there is no allegation against the petitioners of cheating or dishonestly inducing anybody to part with any property etc.. Admittedly, Jaspal Singh was the tenant earlier also, before entering into the tenancy in respect of the 3/5th of the joint family property with the petitioners.

8. Under such circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that even if the entire allegations made against the petitioners in the FIR are considered to be true in their entirety, still the offence punishable under Section 420 of IPC is not made out against the petitioners or for that matter, no offence punishable in the law, is made out against the petitioners, hence, this Court is of the considered view that the continuation of the criminal proceeding in connection with Bistupur P.S. case no. 199