IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2025 (@SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (CRL.) NO. 4755/2025)

RAM SAGAR TIWARI & ORS. …APPELLANT(S)

VERSUS STATE OF UP & ANR. …RESPONDENT(S)

O R D E R

Aravind Kumar, J.

1. Heard.

2. Leave granted.

3. The present appeal is directed against the order dated 19.11.2024 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench in Application under Section 482 CrPC No. 9464 of 2024 whereunder the High Court has declined to quash FIR No. 0002 of 2024 dated 04.01.2024 registered at Police Station Kandhai, District Pratapgarh, as well as the consequential charge-sheet dated 20.08.2024 and the summoning order dated 27.08.2024.

4. The controversy has its genesis in a land dispute pertaining to Gata No. 1786 and adjoining lands situated in Village Salhipur Kanjas, Pargana and Tehsil Signature Not VerifiPedatti, District Pratapgarh, Uttar Pradesh. The original title over the suit land is Digitally signed by Jayant Kumar Arora Date: 2025.08.01

17:15:41 IST stated to have vested in one Thakur Indra Dev Singh, a zamindar, who on Reason:

21.10.1938 executed a patta in favour of two individuals—Matapher (son of Rajit Ram) and Ram Anuj (son of Ram Dular). Pursuant to such grant, the grantees were put in possession, and their names came to be recorded in the revenue records for Fasli Years 1356 and 1359 in respect of Gata No. 1786.

5. Appellant No.1, Ram Sagar Tiwari, who is the son of said Ram Anuj, claims title and possession by succession. Appellant Nos.2 and 3 are his sons. Respondent No.2, Ram Sirnet Tiwari, is the son of Ram Asrey, who belongs to a collateral branch namely brother of Ram Dubey.

6. In the Fasli year 1362, Ram Asrey allegedly caused his name to be entered into the revenue records in respect of Gata No. 1786 without any judicial or administrative order of competent authority. Upon gaining knowledge of the same, Ram Anuj (brother) lodged objections under Section 9A(2) of the Uttar Pradesh Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953, before the Consolidation Officer, Pratapgarh on 18.06.1971, asserting exclusive title.

7. During the pendency of the consolidation proceedings, two compromise deeds were purportedly entered into—first on 26.08.1972 by the wife of Ram Asrey, and later on 15.02.1975 by Ram Asrey himself. These compromises, however, became contentious. Upon challenge, both were scrutinised by the appellate authority. Vide judgment dated 16.10.1975, the Settlement Officer (Consolidation) remanded the matter to the Consolidation Officer for fresh adjudication after finding material irregularities in the compromise including want of signature, absence of proper verification, and procedural impropriety.

8. The consolidation litigation remained pending for decades. Ultimately, by order dated 13.07.2022, the Consolidation Officer dismissed the objections of Appellant No. 2 and directed that the name of Respondent No.1, Ram Sirnet Tiwari, be entered in the revenue records in place of his father Ram Asrey in respect of Khata No. 465. Appellant No.1 preferred an appeal under Section 11(1) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act on 28.07.2022, which remains pending before the Settlement Officer (Consolidation).

9. While the appeal was still under consideration, a series of criminal complaints came to be filed by the son of Respondent No.2, one Devesh Tiwari, an advocate by profession. On 08.08.2022, FIR No. 0766 of 2022 was lodged at Police Station Kotwali, Pratapgarh, under Sections 323, 504, and 506 IPC against the Appellants. Subsequently, FIR No. 0481 of 2022 was registered under Section 307 IPC at Police Station Kandhai against Appellant No.2.

10. Thereafter, on 13.03.2023, Respondent No.2 filed an application under Section 156(3) CrPC before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pratapgarh, alleging that the compromise relied upon in the 1975 proceedings was forged and that the insertion of the name of Ram Anuj in the record was effected by manipulation. By order dat