IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Gurvinder Singh Gill, J.
Gurpreet Singh - Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab - Respondent
CRM-M No. 5944-2020 (O&M) & CRM-M No. 7010-2020 (O&M) & CRM-M No. 9701-2020 (O&M)
Decided On : 09-07-2021
Forgery of Will - Estate Dispute - The court found specific allegations of forgery of a Will and the need for thorough investigation into the alleged forgery. However, custodial interrogation was not warranted due to the documentary nature of the evidence and the petitioners' clean record. The court granted anticipatory bail with the condition of joining investigation and cooperating with the Investigating Officer.
Fact of the Case:
The petitions sought anticipatory bail in a case involving allegations of forgery of a Will related to an estate dispute.
Finding of the Court:
The court found specific allegations of forgery of the Will and the need for thorough investigation into the alleged forgery. However, custodial interrogation was not warranted due to the documentary nature of the evidence and the petitioners' clean record. The court granted anticipatory bail with the condition of joining investigation and cooperating with the Investigating Officer.
Issues: Allegations of forgery of a Will, custodial interrogation, and the need for thorough investigation.
Ratio Decidendi: Custodial interrogation was not warranted due to the documentary nature of the evidence and the petitioners' clean record. The court granted anticipatory bail with the condition of joining investigation and cooperating with the Investigating Officer.
Final Decision: The court accepted the petitions and granted anticipatory bail with the condition of joining investigation and cooperating with the Investigating Officer.
JUDGMENT
Gurvinder Singh Gill, J. (Oral). - This order shall dispose of the above mentioned three petitions filed on behalf of petitioners Gurpreet Singh, Kamaljit Singh and Swaranjit Kaur seeking grant of ancitipatory bail in respect of a case registered vide FIR No.58 dated 26.7.2019 at Police Station Jodhan, District Ludhiana (Rural) under Sections 420/465/467/468/471/120-B and 447 of Indian Penal Code.
2. The FIR in question was lodged at the instance of Gurpreet Kaur, daughter- in-law of Bahadur Singh (deceased).
3. The dispute in hand pertains to the estate of Bahadur Singh, father-in-law of the complainant, who expired on 9.3.2013. Bahadur Singh was survived by a son namely Charanjit Singh and a daughter namely Swaranjit Kaur. The son of Bahadur Singh i.e. Charanjit Singh also expired in the year 2018. As per FIR, after death of Bahadur Singh mutation was registered in respect of his estate equally in the name of Charanjit Singh (son) and Swaranjit Kaur (daughter). However, subsequently the daughter Swaranjit Kaur propounded an unregistered Will purported to have been executed by her father Bahadur Singh in her favour, which according to the complainant is an forged Will. The said Will was attested by Gurpreet Singh and Kamaljit Singh.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in the instant case and that infact the complainant has herself admitted the factum of the Will in question at the time of sanction of mutation on the basis of the Will in question. Learned counsel, in this regard, has referred to the affidavit dated 9.1.2019 (Annexure P-3), wherein Gurpreet Kaur (complainant) has categorically admitted that her father-in- law had executed an unregistered will dated 6.11.2012 in favour of her sisterin-law Swaranjit Kaur. Learned counsel has further submitted that pursuant to interim directions issued by this Court in all the three cases, the petitioners have since joined investigation.
5. Opposing the petition, learned State counsel assisted by counsel for the complainant has submitted that in the instant case not only the Will in question is forged but infact even the affidavit (Annexure P-3) is also forged. It has been pointed out by learned counsel for the complainant that the stamp paper on which affidavit (Annexure P-3) was allegedly executed was purchased by none else but by Kamaljit Singh, the so called attesting witness, who is infact hands in gloves with Swaranjit Kaur. Learned counsel for the complainant has further pointed out that the fact that the Will had been forged would also be evident from the fact that subsequently the accused in order to destroy the evidence regarding their forgery have come up with a plea that the Will in question was lost and the so called attesting witness Kamaljit Singh lodged a DDR regarding said loss i.e. DDR No.017 dated 4.5.2019 registered at Police Station Kharar, District SAS Nagar. It has been submitted that it remains unexplained as to why it is the attesting witness instead of the beneficiary, who lodged the DDR. Learned counsel has further submitted that infact as on the date of alleged execution of will, Kamaljit Singh, attesting witness of the will, was in England and he had no opportunity to attest the Will in India. Learned State counsel has, however, informed that pursuant to interim directions the petitioners have since joined investigation and that the petitioners are neither involved in any other case and nor their custodial interrogation is required.
6. I have considered rival submissions addressed before this Court.
7. This Court does find that there are specific allegations of forgery of Will on part of the accused. The contentions put forth before this Court on behalf of learned counsel for the complainant regarding the alleged forgery and regarding the fact that Kamaljit Singh, attesting witness of the Will, was not in India when the Will was allegedly executed, do need to be probed thoroughly. How
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.