Mere assertion of a false claim in a document does not constitute the document as a false one and does not amount to forgery under Sections 463 and 464 of the Indian Penal Code.

V. S. Aggarwal, J.

1. This is a petition filed by B. R. Gupta son of Baldev Dass (hereinafter described as the petitioner) for quashing the complaint and the order summoning the petitioner as an accused.

2. The relevant facts giving rise to the present petition can briefly be delineated.

3. Respondent-kaushal Kumar (complainant) preferred a criminal complaint with the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Chandigarh asserting that he is a co-owner of building SCF No.7, Sector 22-D, Chandigarh alongwith the petitioner. Petitioner and late Rikhi Ram were brothers and had purchased the said property in-equal share. When Rikhi Ram died, his share was inherited by the complainant and his brother Ved Prakash. Ved Prakash sold his 114th share in the property to the petitioner. Thus petitioner became the owner of 314th share in the property while the share of the complainant was 114th The complainant came to know that some lease deed was executed by the petitioner with the tenant wherein he described that he is the sole proprietor of the building. It is alleged that this tantamount to creating a fictitious document because the petitioner is not the exclusive sole owner of the property.

4. With this background, a criminal complaint was filed against the petitioner with respect to the offences punishable under Sections 465 and 467 of the Indian Penal Code.

5. The learned Judicial Magistrate, Chandigarh after recording the preliminary evidence, concluded prima facie that rent note is a valuable security. There were sufficient grounds to proceed against the petitioner and accordingly he was summoned as an accused. Hence, the present petition.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner asserted that reading of the complaint by itself does not disclose any evidence against the petitioner and, therefore, the order summoning the petitioner as an accused should be quashed. The grounds on which a complaint, as such, can be quashed are well-settled There indeed can be no controversy with the principles enunciated by the Supreme Court in the case of Janaia Dol V/s. H. S. Chowdhary and othas, that inherent powers under Sec.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure can be exercised by the High Court only to give effect to any order passed by the Court, to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. However, it cannot be utilized when the facts are lazy. In paragraph 135 the Supreme Court held: This inherent power conferred by Sec.482 of the Code should not be exercised to stifle a legitimate prosecution. The High Court being the highest Court of a State should normally remain from giving a premature decision in a case wherein the entire facts are extremely incomplete and hazy, more so when the evidence has not been collected and produced before the Court and the issues involved whether factual or legal are of great magnitude and cannot be seen in their true perspective without sufficient material. The said principle is based on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana and others V/s. Ch. Bhajan Lal and others. After scanning through various precedents, the Supreme Court had laid down certain guidelines which are reproduced below for the sake of facility:

1. Where the allegations made in the First Information Report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused.

2. Where the allegations in the First Information Report and other materials, if any, accompanying the F. I. R do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Sec.156 (1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Sect ion 155 (2) of the Code.

3. Where the controvered allegations made in the F. I. R or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the a