PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
J.S. Khehar, J.
Smt. Ram Kaur - Petitioner
Versus
General Public - Respondents
Civil Revision No. 1526 of 1999.
Decided On : 28 July, 1999
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE - SECTION 482 - PROBATE PETITION - WILL - FORGERY - JURISDICTION - CIVIL COURT - CRIMINAL COURT - CONFLICT - STAY OF CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS - SECTION 115 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE - SCOPE - ORDER OF DISTRICT JUDGE - ILLEGALITY AND MATERIAL IRREGULARITY - QUASHING OF ORDER.
Fact of the Case:
A probate petition was filed by the petitioner, Ram Kaur, claiming a plot and house in Hisar on the basis of a Will executed by her deceased brother, Ishar Singh. During the pendency of the probate petition, Inderjeet Kaur, the adopted daughter of Ishar Singh, lodged a first information report alleging that the Will was forged. The District Judge, Hisar, ordered that the Will be sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory for examination of the signatures of the testator.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the District Judge had exercised his jurisdiction illegally and with material irregularity by permitting the examination of the Will by the Forensic Science Laboratory at the behest of the prosecuting agency. The Court relied on the principle that while a civil suit is pending on a subject matter, criminal proceedings cannot be permitted to continue.
Issues: 1. Whether the District Judge had the jurisdiction to order the examination of the Will by the Forensic Science Laboratory during the pendency of the probate petition? 2. Whether the order of the District Judge was illegal and contrary to law?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the District Judge did not have the jurisdiction to order the examination of the Will by the Forensic Science Laboratory during the pendency of the probate petition. The Court relied on the principle that while a civil suit is pending on a subject matter, criminal proceedings cannot be permitted to continue. 2. The Court held that the order of the District Judge was illegal and contrary to law. The Court held that the District Judge had transgressed the law laid down by the Apex Court by permitting the prosecuting agency to determine an issue which was the sole responsibility of the civil Court.
Final Decision: The Court allowed the petition and set aside the order of the District Judge dated 4.3.1999, which had permitted the prosecuting agency to have the authenticity of the Will dated 23.5.1998 verified.
J.S. Khehar, J. - Ishar Singh was the owner of a number of immovable properties including plot No. 66-67 and the house constructed thereon situated in Kamla Nagar, Hisar. It is not disputed that the aforesaid Ishar Singh did not have a natural born child. It is also not disputed that his wife had pre-deceased him. The case set up by the petitioner, who is the sister of said Ishar Singh, is that during his life time, Ishar Singh lived with her, and in lieu of the services rendered by her, he executed a Will dated 23.5.1998 in her favour in respect of plot No. 66-67 and the house constructed thereon, situated in Kamla Nagar, Hisar. After the execution of the aforesaid Will, Ishar Singh is stated to have died on 19.9.1998, whereupon the petitioner preferred a probate petition on 13.10.1998 claiming plot No. 66-67 and the house constructed heron, situated in Kamla Nagar, Hisar, on the basis of the Will dated 23.5.1998. In furtherance an application for an interim injunction moved by petitioner Ram Kaur along with the probate petition, status quo was ordered to be maintained in respect of the property in question.
2. Inderjeet Kaur is stated to be the adopted daughter of Ishar Singh. She lodged a first information report on 26.11.1998 against petitioner Ram Kaur alleging that Ram Kaur had forged the Will dated 23.5.1998 with the motive of grabbing the property of Ishar Singh.
3. During the course of proceedings in the civil Court, wherein the probate petition of Ram Kaur was being entertained, the counsel for petitioner Ram Kaur produced the original Will with a request that the same be put in a sealed cover. It is not disputed that the original Will is with the civil Court and that it was duly sealed on the basis of the written request made by the counsel for the petitioner. The request of petitioner Ram Kaur to seal the Will was in furtherance of the desire that the Will may not be tampered with while in the custody of the Court.
4. In furtherance of the first information report got registered on 26.11.1998 by Inderjeet Kaur against petitioner Ram Kaur, Sub Inspector, Civil Lines, Hisar, moved an application dated 18.12.1998, requesting for the release of the original Will in order to have the signatures of the testator Ishar Singh compared with his admitted signatures at the Forensic Science Laboratory, Madhuban. The request of the Sub Inspector, Civil Lines, Hisar, was contested tooth and nail by the petitioner, who feared that the Will might be tampered with if it was released by the Court, since the husband of Inderjeet Kaur i.e. Raminder Singh was alleged to be an extremely influential person. The District Judge, Hisar, vide his order dated 4.3.1999, directed that the Will be sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory, Madhuban, on the expenses of the prosecution. It is the order of the District Judge, Hisar, dated 4.3.1999, which is being impugned in the instant case by petitioner Ram Kaur.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on the decision in Sardool Singh and another v. Smt. Nasib Kaur, 1987 (Supp.) SSC 146. Paragraph 2 of the aforesaid judgment is relevant for the present case. The same is extracted hereunder for facility of reference :
"A civil suit between the parties is pending wherein the contention of the respondent is that no Will was executed whereas the contention of the appellants is that a Will has been executed by the testator. A case for grant of probate is also pending in the Court of learned District Judge, Rampur. The civil Court is therefore seized of the question as regards the validity of the Will. The matter is sub judice in the aforesaid two cases in civil Courts. At this juncture the respondent cannot therefore be permitted to institute a criminal prosecution on the allegation that the Will is a forged one. That question will have to be decided by the civil Court after recording the evidence and hearing the parties in accordance with law. It would not be proper to permit the respon
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.