Filing a false affidavit is a serious offense and can lead to legal consequences under the Indian Penal Code and the Contempt of Courts Act.

ORDER : – This application under section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code has been filed against the order dated 30-6-2016 passed by Eleventh Additional Sessions Judge, Gwalior in Criminal Appeal No. 65/2016, thereby affirming the order dated 7-1-2016 passed by Thirteenth Civil Judge, Class-II, Gwalior in MJC No. 0/2015, by which the application filed by the applicants under section 340 of Criminal Procedure Code has been rejected.

2. The necessary facts for disposal of the present application in short are that the respondents filed a suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction. It is the case of the respondents that they are the real brother and sister. The land in dispute, i.e. survey Nos. 519, 529, 532, total area 3.889 hectare situated in Patwari Halka No. 92, village Morar, District Gwalior is the joint property of the respondents as well as the applicants and the respondents have 1/2 share in the said joint property. The mother of the respondents, namely, Smt. Raksha Devi and husband of the applicant No. 1 and father of the applicants No. 2 to 4 were the joint owners and after their death, the respondents as well as the applicants became the joint owner of the said property. The respondents started residing in Punjab, whereas the land was being cultivated through the labourers and after the death of their mother, the respondents are in cultivating possession of half portion of the land through their labourers. The applicants are the wife and children of the maternal uncle of the respondents and, therefore, the respondents never had any doubt on the honesty of the applicants. Since the respondents were residing in Punjab, therefore, taking advantage of the said fact, the applicants prepared a forged Will of Smt. Raksha Devi dated 12-2-1991 and on the basis of the said forged Will, they moved an application for mutation of their names. The respondents got an information through their reliable sources and filed an objection to the mutation application and also prayed that since the applicants are relying upon the forged Will of Smt. Raksha Devi, therefore, the said forged Will should be got examined by a handwriting expert because their mother had already expired on 3-12-2001 and she had never executed any Will in favour of the applicants or any other person. It was further pleaded that the forged Will dated 12-2-1991 does not contain the thumb impression of their mother. However, without verifying the correctness and genuineness of the Will, the Tahsildar passed a mutation order in favour of the applicants, against which, an appeal is pending before the Court of SDO, Gwalior. It was further alleged that after the mutation was done by the Tahsildar, the applicants came to the disputed land along with armed persons on 8-7-2012. The respondent No. 1 was present on the spot. The applicants extended a threat that now as they have won their case from the Tahsil Office, therefore, the respondent No. 1 should handover the vacant possession of the disputed property, otherwise they would alienate the same to the powerful persons, who in their turn would dispossess the respondents forcefully. The respondent No. 1 made an oral complaint to the Police Station Morar, but since the dispute was of civil in nature, therefore, no action was taken and under these circumstances, the suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction was filed.

3. It appears that in the said civil suit, the respondents filed an application under section 45 of the Evidence Act on the ground that the disputed Will dated 12-2-1991 is a forged document. The father of the respondent was a government employee and after his death, their mother was getting family pension and, therefore, her disputed signatures/thumb impressions can be compared with the admitted signatures or thumb impressions on the ID proof as well as original passbook. The said application was allowed by order dated 27-11-2013. Thereafter, an another affidavit was filed to the effect th