Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
In legal disputes involving registered documents like deeds, wills, or powers of attorney, parties often claim long-term ignorance to defend their position. But what happens when someone asserts no knowledge about the registered document for more than ten years? Courts typically scrutinize such claims closely, especially without supporting evidence. This can lead to interpretations of feigned innocence—a deliberate pretense of ignorance to conceal true knowledge or involvement. This blog delves into this concept, drawing from key judicial precedents and legal principles under Indian law.
We'll examine the main legal findings, presumptions for aged documents, the pitfalls of prolonged silence, and practical takeaways. Note: This is general information based on case law and not specific legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for your situation.
The question at hand is straightforward yet profound: Can a claim of no knowledge about a registered document for more than ten years be accepted, or is it dismissed as feigned innocence? Generally, courts have held that such long-standing lack of knowledge, absent credible evidence, raises suspicion and may be viewed as an attempt to hide facts.
As outlined in relevant judgments, a long-standing lack of knowledge about a registered document for more than ten years, without any evidence to dispel suspicion, can be regarded as feigned innocence and may be interpreted as an attempt to conceal true knowledge or involvement PARMINDER KAUR VS STATE OF U. P. - 2009 0 Supreme(SC) 1675. This principle underscores that mere time passage doesn't equate to innocence; conduct matters.
A key starting point is Section 90 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, which creates a presumption for documents over 30 years old. If produced from proper custody, such documents are presumed duly executed and attested, with signatures in the purported signatory's handwriting. The burden shifts to the challenger to disprove this D. R. Rathna Murthy VS Ramappa - 2010 6 Supreme 769.
However, this presumption isn't a shield for ignorance claims. For instance, in cases involving registered wills or deeds over 30 years, courts still demand proof of genuine unawareness. One judgment notes, The document is a registered will and more than 30 years old document Rajkumar Baraiya VS Virendra Bapna - 2018 Supreme(MP) 420, yet impleadment was rejected without substantiation. Similarly, The registered document was more than 30 years old in a gift deed dispute, where awareness was imputed despite challenges Belo Devi VS Urmila Devi - 2015 Supreme(P&H) 24.
This presumption supports authenticity but doesn't automatically validate innocence claims over extended periods.
Prolonged silence is a red flag. Courts infer feigned innocence from inaction, especially when opportunities to verify or challenge existed. In a pivotal case, the court found that no explanation for the delay or silence over ten years, coupled with the absence of any attempt to verify or acknowledge the registered document, could be construed as innocent or genuine PARMINDER KAUR VS STATE OF U. P. - 2009 0 Supreme(SC) 1675. Such behavior suggests deliberate concealment or suppression of facts.
This echoes across rulings:- Appellant remained silent for about more than ten years. In such circumstances, we are not at all impressed with the submission... Indu Kushwah VS Manoj Singh Kushwah - 2013 Supreme(MP) 290, in a divorce context highlighting delayed action.- However, no such explanation was forthcoming and the appellants merely feigned ignorance as demonstrated by their responses in the examination under Section 313 CrPC Must Dewly Begum @ Gulbahar Begum VS State of Assam - 2018 Supreme(Gau) 1289, linking silence to inconsistent innocence pleas.- In another, the petitioner feigned absence despite multiple notices, rejecting the claim outright VISHNU DUTT SHARMA vs HARYANA STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION, PANCHKULA AND ANR.
These examples show courts evaluate overall conduct: delay, lack of denial, or failure to investigate. Mere lapse of time without engagement doesn't dispel suspicion PARMINDER KAUR VS STATE OF U. P. - 2009 0 Supreme(SC) 1675.
Feigned innocence often arises in property, forgery, or family disputes. Consider forgery cases where knowledge is key: the prosecution had failed to prove that the Accused had forged the document or whether he had any knowledge that it was not the signature Meragal Pedige Senarathne vs Hon. Attorney General - - 2023 Supreme(SRI)(CA) 335. Here, lack of proven knowledge led to acquittal, contrasting with suspicious silence.
In property transfers, purchasers verifying records before buying a property via unrevoked power of attorney faced no limitation bar from alleged knowledge of fraud... after 6 years Rajinder Kumar Gupta VS Swaran Dass - 2016 Supreme(P&H) 1036. This reinforces that registered documents demand prompt action.
Criminal contexts amplify this: Under IPC sections like 467/471, the accused must be the maker for forgery liability, but feigned ignorance during examination under Section 313 CrPC undermines defenses Vijay Pal Sharma VS State of NCT of Delhi - 2023 Supreme(Del) 3316Must Dewly Begum @ Gulbahar Begum VS State of Assam - 2018 Supreme(Gau) 1289. Even in acquittals for lack of intent (e.g., fire incidents under IPC 427/435), proven ignorance via evidence succeeded, unlike unexplained delays State of Himachal Pradesh VS Krishan Lal - 2017 Supreme(HP) 781.
Not all long ignorance claims fail. Courts consider:- Credible evidence: Verifiable explanations or active denials can rebut presumptions D. R. Rathna Murthy VS Ramappa - 2010 6 Supreme 769.- Contextual factors: Overall circumstances, like family involvement or external proof of unawareness PINKI AND ORS vs OMBIR AND ORS.- Burden of proof: Prosecution must show knowledge beyond doubt; defense needs consistent conduct Meragal Pedige Senarathne vs Hon. Attorney General - - 2023 Supreme(SRI)(CA) 335.
For instance, rebuttal evidence rules limit late introductions if not pled initially Belo Devi VS Urmila Devi - 2015 Supreme(P&H) 24. Presumptions don't establish innocence outright—active proof is needed PARMINDER KAUR VS STATE OF U. P. - 2009 0 Supreme(SC) 1675.
To avoid feigned innocence labels:- Document everything: Record active denials, verifications, or inquiries promptly.- Provide explanations: Offer verifiable reasons for delays, backed by affidavits or witnesses.- Act timely: Challenge suspicious documents within limitation periods (e.g., Article 59, Limitation Act—3 years for registered deeds) Rajinder Kumar Gupta VS Swaran Dass - 2016 Supreme(P&H) 1036.- Engage experts: Use handwriting/fingerprint analysis early if disputing execution Belo Devi VS Urmila Devi - 2015 Supreme(P&H) 24.
Courts urge balanced evaluation: The court must consider the overall conduct, circumstances, and any explanations provided before concluding feigned innocence PARMINDER KAUR VS STATE OF U. P. - 2009 0 Supreme(SC) 1675.
In summary, while time can heal some wounds, legal silence amplifies doubts. Understanding these nuances helps navigate disputes effectively. For personalized guidance, seek professional legal counsel.
References:1. PARMINDER KAUR VS STATE OF U. P. - 2009 0 Supreme(SC) 1675: Core on feigned innocence and silence.2. D. R. Rathna Murthy VS Ramappa - 2010 6 Supreme 769: Presumption under Evidence Act.3. Additional insights from Must Dewly Begum @ Gulbahar Begum VS State of Assam - 2018 Supreme(Gau) 1289, Indu Kushwah VS Manoj Singh Kushwah - 2013 Supreme(MP) 290, Belo Devi VS Urmila Devi - 2015 Supreme(P&H) 24, etc.
#FeignedInnocence, #EvidenceAct, #LegalPresumptions
As is well - settled, circumstantial evidence, before it can be accepted, must not only connect or implicate the accused with the offence charged; it must also be inconsistent with any plea of innocence of such accused. ... 14. ... P - 2 has been identified to be in the hand of the accused - petitioner, it would follow that he must have had knowledge of the forged signature and forged initial cannot be accepted and acted upon. ... 15. ... P - 2) he did so dishonestly or fraudulently and that further....
Hence it is of our opinion, we can assess that the prosecution had failed to prove that the Accused had forged the document or whether he had any knowledge that it was not the signature of PW2 found in the document. ... However, it is vital to note that he states that he did not see who signed nor prepared the document. ... It was later revealed that the document marked as P1 was not signed by PW2, thereafter he had made a complaint to the police. ....
Statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C, wherein he denied the prosecution case and claimed innocence. Accused did not lead any defence evidence. ... She has argued that neither the accused was having intent nor knowledge to put fire, so he could not be held guilty, further PW-8, Investigation Officer, has admitted that the fire could have taken place due to biri, cigarette being thrown by the people passing through the path, as on that day there ... PW-6, Bishan Singh, has deposed that he is worki....
knowledge of same and acquired knowledge of notice, Annexure P-4. ... The petitioner also acquired the knowledge that he was called for scrutiny of documents on 26.11.2018 and candidates who were not present I am afraid the aforementioned contention cannot be accepted for the simple reason that three opportunities have been granted by Haryana Staff Selection Commission but petitioner feigned
Whenever a document is registered the date of registration becomes the date of deemed knowledge. ... (dead) by Lrs (supra), whenever a document is registered, the date of registration becomes the date of deemed knowledge. ... While the High Court came to the correct conclusion that Under Article 59 of the Limitation Act, a suit can be instituted within 3 years of the knowledge, it proceeded to return a finding that in cases where the docume....
accepted legal parameters. ... Therefore, the presumption in favour of the accused does not get weakened but only strengthened. Such a double presumption that enures in favour of the accused has to be disturbed only by thorough scrutiny on the accepted legal parameters.” IPC was registered against the accused. The investigation was conducted by S.I. Prem Chand, who visited the spot, prepared spot map and photographed the spot. The Bus was impounded alongwith its documents and was got mechanically examined.
However, no such explanation was forthcoming and the appellants merely feigned ignorance as demonstrated by their responses in the examination under Section 313 CrPC. Such failure to give explanation is inconsistent with the plea of innocence put forward by Mr. H.R.A. Choudhury. ... Section 326 IPC provides that whoever, except in the case provided for by Section 335, voluntarily causes grievous hurt by means of, amongst others, fire, shall be punished with imprisonment for life or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to #HL_....
It has been categorically pleaded that on acquiring the knowledge of the aforementioned, sale deed, the suit was filed and the sale deed being a registered document, can be challenged within a period of three years, as per the provisions of Article 59 of the Limitation Act. ... The respondents have purchased the property after verifying the record and noticing the fact that power of attorney, aforementioned, was registered document which had not been revoked or cancel....
either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine. ... In this regard, the petitioner has neither addressed any arguments nor the petitioner has placed on record any document regarding status of the FIR directed to be registered against him. Even the FIR No. has not been mentioned and the said FIR has also not been placed on record. ... Therefore, execution of such document (purporting to convey some property of which he is ....
The FIR was registered on 21.04.2015, however, make colour or vehicle number was not mentioned in the FIR. Sandeep at whose behest FIR was registered disclosed number of alleged vehicle on 09.05.2015. 10. ... If it is not so, the claim petition cannot be accepted. My aforesaid view is based upon Kamla Devi and others versus Dharampal and others, 2016 (2) PLR 127 (P&H). ... In the present case the deceased was attending by family and relatives who were having know....
Hence, it cannot be said that the sentence can be ten years or more or that it cannot be a sentence of not less than ten years. 18. Since, under Section 386 of I.P.C., punishment provided was of imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years and also liable to fine, the Hon'ble Apex Court held that the imprisonment can be for a clear period of ten years or less. Applying the same principle to the facts of the present case it will have to be held that offence under Section 353 of the I.P.C. cannot be regarded as an offence, the prescribed punishm....
The document is a registered will and more than 30 years old document. Learned trial Court, after hearing the arguments rejected the application under Order 1 rule 10 CPC without considering the fact that petitioner is in possession and carrying on business and is a necessary party, therefore, the petitioner has no other alternative but to approach this Court by filing the present writ petition. Counsel for the petitioner contends that petitioner's father Late Shri Laxmi Chand Baraiya had executed a registered will dated 27.7.1965 in which the right in the business has also....
Clause (i) of the proviso (a) to Section 167 (2) would not cover the offence for which punishment would be imprisonment for less than ten years and accordingly the order of the Magistrate granting bail to the accused on the ground that charge sheet was not submitted within sixty days was ultimately upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. In view of the punishment prescribed U/s.386 I.P.C., imprisonment can be for a clear period of ten years or less. Hence, it could not be said that minimum sentence would be ten years or more rather the imprisonment can vary from minimum to maximum ten....
It was submitted that the respondent-defendants had examined the thumb impressions of the plaintiff on the gift deed, admittedly, to prove that the gift deed had been executed. The plea taken was that the gift deed was by fraud and collusion and once the onus was upon the plaintiff on issue No.2- Counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, has submitted that it was an admitted fact that the plaintiff was aware of the gift deed and the thumb impressions were there of the plaintiff herself, on account of her being a witness. The registered document was more than 30 years old and ....
Appellant remained silent for about more than ten years. In such circumstances, we are not at all impressed with the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant. Appellant has initiated these proceedings much after filing of this petition for divorce.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
