Back
2022 Supreme(All) 998
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
SUNEET KUMAR, SYED WAIZ MIAN, JJ.
Manoj Singh And Another – Appellant
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others – Respondents
Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 7051 of 2022
Decided on : 07-09-2022
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Pramod Kumar Panday, Durgesh Kumar Singh, Shyam Singh
For the Respondent: Rajendra Singh
Criminal color should not be imparted to civil disputes, and criminal proceedings should not be used as a weapon of harassment.
Headnote:
Forgery - Criminal Misc. Writ petition - Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC - [Mitesh Kumar J. Sha v. State of Karnataka, 2021 SCC Online SC 976, Prof. RK Vijayasarathy vs. Sudha Seetharam 2019 (16) SCC 739, State of Haryana v. Bhajanlal (1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, Indian Oil Corps. V. NEPC India Ltd. & Ors (2006) 6 SCC 736, Kapil Agarwal vs. Sanjay Sharma (2021 5 SCC 524), Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra, 2021 SCC Online SC 315, A.P. Mahesh Coop. Urban Bank Shareholders Welfare Assn. v. Ramesh Kumar Bung, (2021) 9 SCC 152] - The court discussed the validity and authenticity of the will, the nature of the dispute, and the abuse of criminal proceedings for civil disputes. The court referred to various judgments to emphasize that criminal color should not be imparted to civil disputes and that criminal proceedings should not be used as a weapon of harassment.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought to quash an impugned First Information Report (FIR) alleging forgery and fraud in obtaining a will and mutation of property names.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the FIR was lodged maliciously and with ulterior motives, giving a pure civil dispute a criminal color. The court quashed the FIR and allowed the aggrieved party to seek recourse before the competent court regarding the validity of the will.
Issues: The main issue was whether the allegations in the FIR gave rise to disputes of pure civil nature or were maliciously initiated to coerce the petitioner into a compromise outside the court.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the finding that the criminal proceedings were initiated maliciously and that the FIR was a case of pure civil nature given a criminal color with ulterior motive.
Final Decision: The court quashed the FIR and allowed the aggrieved party to seek recourse before the competent court regarding the validity of the will.
JUDGMENT :
Syed Waiz Mian, J.
1. At the very outset, learned counsel for the respondent no. 3 submits to decide the instant writ petition, at the admission stage itself, to which learned counsel for the petitioners also expresses his agreement, thus this writ petition is being taken up for its final disposal at the stage of admission.
2. Heard Shri Pramod Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A. for the State and Shri Rajendra Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no. 3.
3. This Criminal Misc. Writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been preferred by the petitioners, Manoj Singh and his wife Sunita Singh, for quashing the impugned First Information Report, stay their arrest, and for restraining the respondents from taking any coercive steps against them, in consequence of impugned First Information Report, having been scribed on 18.04.2022, by the respondent no. 3, Vinod Kumar Singh, at Case Crime No. 69 of 2022, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 I.P.C., Police Station-Chandauli, District-Chandauli.
4. This Criminal Misc. Writ Petition arising out of aforementioned First Information Report. It is alleged in the said First Information that petitioner no. 1 is real brother of the informant and after death of their father in the year 2003 the petitioners, by hatching a conspiracy, executed a forged and fabricated, alleged will, in their name and in Suit No. 1197 of 2021, Rekha Singh vs. Harihar Singh, got mutated their names by the Court of Tehsildar concerned, vide order dated 29.07.2021 and when it came to the knowledge of the respondent no. 3 he lodged the impugned First Information Report. It is also averred in the First Information Report that the attesting witness Shiv Poojan Singh had died on 14.07.2021, whereas, his statement is said to have been recorded on 29.07.2021. The other attesting witness, Prem Prakash, having been shown to have filed his affidavit, affirming therein that he neither filed his affidavit nor has put his signature nor has any knowledge about the alleged will. In view of the objection and affidavits having been filed in the Court of concerned Tehsildar, the exparte mutation order dated 29.07.2021 has been set-aside.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners mentioned that the alleged will, executed by Shri Harihar Singh, before his death, was in the consideration for their rendered services, care and out of love and affection and the same is valid, genuine and true.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the impugned First Information Report is being challenged chiefly on the ground that the allegations made therein are false, frivolous and arbitrary and also on the premise that a civil dispute being given a criminal colour by way of registration of First Information Report. It is argued that the validity and authenticity of the will is predominantly and overwhelmingly of a civil nature which needs to be contested before an appropriate forum having jurisdiction.
7. On behalf of the petitioners, certified copy of the First Information Report, presented by the respondent no. 3, against the petitioners, under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandauli, affidavits of deponent, Sandeep Kumar Singh, statement of Shiv Poojan Singh, recorded before the Court of Tehsildar, alleged will, judgment and order of Tehsildar, concerned, in connection with Suit No. RST/00799/2020, Rekha Singh vs. Harihar Singh, under Section 34 of Revenue Code, 2006, statement of Prem Prakash Singh, recorded in the said suit have been annexed with the writ petition.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioners in support of his arguments, refers to the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court, passed in Mitesh Kumar J. Sha v. State of Karnataka, 2021 SCC Online SC 976, wherein which in para no. 47 reads as under;
“Moreover, this Court at innumerable instances expressed its disapproval for imparting criminal color to a civil dispute, made merely to take a
