Punjab-Haryana High Court
Vinod Kumar vs State Of Haryana And Another on 10 April, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:049591
CRM-M-11004-2024 -1-
136 2024:PHHC:049591
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-11004-2024
Date of Decision : 10.04.2024
DEEPAK .....Petitioner
VERSUS
STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS .....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI
Present : Mr. Aditya Sanghi, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Mr. Bhupender Singh, DAG, Haryana.
KULDEEP TIWARI. J.(Oral)
1. The petitioner, who is an accused in case FIR No.217, dated
27.03.2021 (Annexure P-1), registered under Section 406 and 420 of the
IPC, (Sections 419, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC added later on), at
Police Station City Yamunanagar, District Yamunanagar, has approached
this Court for quashing of aforesaid FIR, alongwith all consequential
proceedings arising therefrom, by invoking the provisions of Section 482
Cr.P.C.
2. One Mr. Mridul Garg, set the prosecution agency into motion
by making a complaint against four persons, out of which present
petitioner, is the main accused, against whom allegation therein, is that
he prepared a forged Will of Sh.Jai Kant Jindal, who had died issueless
on dated 27.04.2019.
3. The relevant extract of the FIR reads as under:-
"Copy of contents of the complaint is as under: - To,
The Superintendent of Police, District Yamuna Nagar. Subject:
1 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:049591
Application for registering a case against (i) Ankur Kumar S/o
Dinesh Kumar, resident of 8A, Adarsh Nagar, Yamuna Nagar, (2)
Akal Chand S/o Jaimal, resident of Behlolpur, District Saharanpur
(3) Vinod Kumar S/o Mahavir Prasad, resident of H.No. 841,
Samadh Gali, Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar, (4) Raman Singh
Chauhan, Advocate, Jagadhri Court, 93158-33397 Sir, it is requested
that Shri Jaikant Jindal, son of Shri Balwant Rai Jindal, resident of
house no. 1336, Jindal House, Yamuna Gali, Yamuna Nagar, was my
real brother, who died on 27.04.2019. He had no children of his
own. Now I, the applicant and my brother Mr. Anil Kant Jindal, who
lives in Canada, are the heirs of Mr. Jaikant Jindal and apart from
us, Mr. Jaikant Jindal has no other heir. Shri Jaikant Jindal has a lot
of property in his name in Yamuna Nagar district. Many people,
thinking that Shri Jaikant Jindal was alone, have prepared fake wills
with the intention of usurping his property. Firstly, Harpreet Singh,
resident of Naharpur, approached M.C. to get the property of Shri
Jaikant Jindal transferred in his name on the basis of a fake will. The
application was given in Yamuna Nagar, after coming to my notice, I
have registered a case/FIR No. 0115/2020 against him and others in
police station Sector-17, HUDA Jagadhri. Which is
being investigated by the Economic Offenses Wing. Similarly,
accused Vinod Kumar has also prepared a fake will of Shri Jaikant
Jindal along with other accused and in which the date is shown as
25.04.2019. This will has been fraudulently prepared by the accused
persons with the help of other people with the intention of usurping
the property of Shri Jaikant Jindal by claiming servant to him.
Accused Vinod Kumar neither had any relation with our family nor
was he ever a servant of my brother Jaikant Jindal. But with the
intention of grabbing the property of Shri Jaikant Jindal, the accused
Vinod Kumar is calling himself a servant of my brother. Whereas, he
was never my brother's servant. In the fake will dated 25.04.2019,
the age of my brother Shri Jaikant Jindal is mentioned as 60 years
and his father's name is Balwant Ram Jindal, whereas at that time
my brother was 68 years old and father's name was Balwant Rai.
Raman Singh Chauhan was never my brother's lawyer and Shri
Jaikant Jindal had no connection with the false witnesses namely
Ankur Kumar and Akal Chand as mentioned on the will. Fake
witness Akal Chand has written the name of his village as
Behlolpur, whereas he is a resident of Jharauli village and only does
fraudulent work. Vinod Kumar has also made his acquaintance
Ankur Kumar a false witness in this will. On the basis of fake will,
Vinod Kumar had given an application to Yamuna Nagar Committee
to get house number 1336 transfer in his name. Along with the
application, Vinod Kumar has also attached his false affidavit and
fake death certificate of Jaikant Jindal. This death certificate has
been obtained by Vinod Kumar through presenting some Suman
Jindal as wife of Jaikant Jindal, from Committee Yamuna Nagar.
Whereas no woman named Suman Jindal was the wife of Shri
Jaikant Jindal. Otherwise also, Shri Jaikant Jindal died in Civil
Hospital Yamuna Nagar and Civil Hospital Yamuna Nagar has
issued death certificate on 15.05.2019. On the basis of fake will,
Vinod Kumar has filed applications in many cases to become the
heir of Shri Jaikant Jindal. Advocate Raman Chauhan is also in
collusion with the culprits and at the behest of Akal Chand, he has
put his seal on the fake will with no serial number, recorded.
Therefore, I request you to register a case against the above-
mentioned accused persons and their associates. They have formed a
2 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:049591
gang in which many people are involved and from them our lives
and property should be protected and we should get justice. It will
be so kind of you. Thank you. Sd:- Mridul Garg, Applicant Mridul
Garg wife of Shri Mohan Lal Garg resident of Press Lane, Kheda
Bazar Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar. Mob. No. 9017574778
Dated 02.02.2021."
4. The allegation clearly spells out against the petitioner that he
forged a Will, and thereafter, got transferred the entire property of the
deceased-Jai Kant Jindal, in his name.
5. In asking for the relief (supra), learned counsel for the
petitioner submits that the petitioner has already preferred a civil suit
whereby, he seeks a declaration qua the property mentioned in the plaint
belonging to the deceased-Jai Kant Jindal, on the basis of a Will. In that
suit general public as well as the Sub-Registrar, and Municipal
Corporation, Yamunanagar, have been arrayed as respondents, and the
complainant has also caused appearance in that suit on dated 18.01.2021,
and impleaded himself as a party.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon a
judgement passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sardool Singh and
another vs. Nasib Kaur (Smt.), 1987(supp.) SCC 146; and a judgement
passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, in Vinod Kumar vs. The
State of Madhya Pradesh, (MCRC-7040-2016, decided on 01.08.2016).
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the civil
suit is pending, where the issue of Will is under challenge, therefore, the
criminal proceedings is not maintainable.
8. On the other hand, learned State counsel vociferously
opposed the grant of relief (supra) to the petitioner.
3 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:049591
9. This Court has heard the learned counsel for both the parties
concerned, and has examined entire case file, as well as the judgment
rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court, and thereupon, this Court is of the
view that the instant petition is devoid of any merits, for the reason that in
the instant case, after registration of the FIR, the investigation was carried
out, and has already been completed, and one of the witnesses, who
drafted the Will, also cited as a prosecution witness, has not supported the
case of the present petitioner, which prima facie gives inference that the
Will is a result of fabrication.
10. So far as the reliance placed upon, by learned counsel for the
petitioner on the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Sardool
Singh's case (supra), is concerned, the facts in that case are altogether
different. In that case, the issue for grant of probate was pending before
the learned District Court concerned, and the civil suit was also pending
with regard to the question of validity of Will, therefore, the Hon'ble
Apex Court concluded in those circumstances that the FIR in question is
not maintainable, as the veracity of the Will is yet to be established.
11. Whereas, in the present case, petitioner was totally alien to
the deceased-Jai Kant Jinal, who was living alone, and, as per the
allegations, after his death the petitioner not only prepared a forged Will,
but also filed suit by impleading only general public as well as the Sub-
Registrar and Municipal Corporation, Yamunanagar, as respondents,
without impleading Class-I legal heirs of the deceased, as a party, which
reflects the conduct of the petitioner.
4 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:049591
12. The Class-I legal heirs of the deceased, who mainly resides
in USA after coming to know about the illegal act of the present
petitioner, got themselves impleaded as a party in the above mentioned
civil suit, and now the petitioner wants to take the benefit of that civil
suit, seeking quashing of the criminal proceedings against him. The
conduct of the petitioner as well as the evidence collected during the
investigation, prima facie reflects that the petitioner has forged the Will
of the deceased-Jai Kant Jindal, in order to deprive his Class-I legal heirs,
specifically when he has no relation with the deceased.
13. In view of the facts and circumstances recorded hereinabove,
the asked for relief of quashing of FIR (supra) simply on the ground of
pendency of the civil suit, cannot be granted to the present petitioner.
14. Consequently, the instant petition is dismissed.
(KULDEEP TIWARI)
April 10, 2024 JUDGE
dharamvir
Whether speaking/reasoned. : Yes/No
Whether Reportable. : Yes/No
5 of 5
