Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(UK) 136

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Alok Kumar Verma, J.
Ravindra Brahamchari - Applicant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and Another - Respondents
Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.141 of 2021
Decided On : 19-06-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Applicant :Mr. Ramji Srivastava, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, AGA (through video conferencing) assisted by Mr. Rakesh Negi, Brief Holder, Mr. Yash Mishra, Advocate.

IMPORTANT POINT
The court reaffirmed that inherent powers under Section 482 of the CrPC should be exercised cautiously and only to prevent abuse of process, not to assess the merits of allegations.

Headnote:
Quash - Criminal Proceedings - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 482 - The court discussed the inherent powers under Section 482 to quash proceedings, emphasizing that such powers should be exercised sparingly and only to prevent abuse of process or secure justice, not to evaluate evidence.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant, accused of forging a will and related documents, sought to quash criminal proceedings against him. The prosecution alleged that he used a forged will to claim rights over a society's property, leading to multiple FIRs and civil suits.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the allegations against the applicant were not frivolous and that the FIRs were based on new facts, thus refusing to quash the proceedings. It emphasized that the trial court must determine the merits of the case.
Issues: Whether the criminal proceedings against the applicant can be quashed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, given the allegations of forgery and the existence of prior FIRs.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that inherent powers under Section 482 should not be used to evaluate evidence or dismiss cases where allegations disclose a prima facie case, and that the existence of civil disputes does not preclude criminal proceedings.
Result: The application under Section 482 of the Code is dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

Alok Kumar Verma, J.

The applicant – accused Ravindra Brahamchari has invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short, “Code”) to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.518 of 2020, “State vs. Ravindra Brahamchari”, pending before the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Narendra Nagar, District Tehri Garhwal.

2. The case of the prosecution is that Sachcha Vedic Sansthan was formed in the year, 1973. The patron of the said Sansthan was Swami Hansraj. The said Sansthan was registered on 08.07.1981 in the office of the Registrar, Firms and Chit Funds, Dehradun. Swami Hansraj died on 23.10.2011. On 07.11.2011, at the time of Sodashi, the present applicant – Ravindra Brahamchari, who was removed from the post of the driver of the Sansthan, produced a will stating that Maharaj ji had declared him as his heir and custodian of his property. In relation to the said forged will, an FIR was lodged against the applicant at Muni-Ki-Reti police station, which was registered under Sections 420, 467, 468 and Section 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, “IPC”) and two civil suits were filed against him with the relief of perpetual injunction. When the signature of Maharaj ji was examined, the said will was found to be fake. The said civil suits were decided in favour of the respondent no.2, against which two civil appeals were filed. The said Civil Appeals (Civil Appeal No.06 of 2016 and Civil Appeal No.07 of 2016) were decided vide judgment and decree dated 14.12.2017, whereby the judgment and decree, passed by learned Trial Court, were set aside and the matter was remitted back to the Trial Court for fresh decision.

3. The applicant filed two Miscellaneous Appeals against the remand order, in which the stay orders were passed by this Court. Thereafter, the applicant had withdrawn both the appeals. The applicant formed a new Committee on 03.09.2013 and got it registered from the Registrar Office, Dehradun. Applicant lodged an FIR on 04.10.2016 that papers of his old Committee had fallen on the way. Applicant, along with a false affidavit, put his signature on the balance sheet for the year, 2013-2014, which was filed by Surendra Mittal, the respondent no.2, and filed it before the Deputy Registrar Office, Dehradun with an undertaking that remaining balance sheet would be filed within two months. During the course of the investigation, it was found that the applicant had registered his Society on the basis of forged document, therefore, a charge-sheet has been filed against him before the Trial Court.

4. The First Information Report was lodged by Surendra Mittal, the respondent no.2, on 22.01.2019.

5. Subsequent to the submission of the charge-sheet, the learned Judicial Magistrate, Narendra Nagar, District Tehri Garhwal took cognizance and passed the summoning order against the applicant under Sections 420, 467, 468 and Section 471 IPC.

6. Heard Mr. Ramji Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, learned AGA through video conferencing assisted by Mr. Rakesh Negi, learned Brief Holder for the State and Mr. Yash Mishra, learned counsel for the respondent no.2.

7. Mr. Ramji Srivastava, Advocate, contended that Swami Hansraj ji Maharaj, the Owner and Sanrakshak of Sachcha Vedic Sansthan, had executed a registered will dated 30.08.2010 in favour of the applicant in view of the services rendered by him as his disciple. Swami Hansraj ji Maharaj died on 23.10.2011. Thereafter, on the basis of the will dated 30.08.2010, applicant became Sanrakshak of the said Society, registered under the provisions of the Societies Registration Act, 1860. On 18.11.2011, the said Society was renewed for further period of 5 years consisting of 21 members and thereafter got it renewed from time to time. On 25.01.2012, the respondent no.2 lodged an FIR (FIR No.03 of 2012) against the applicant, which was registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and Section 1