The Supreme Court has allowed the appeals and set aside the judgment of the High Court, observing that quashing of the FIR at the threshold was premature and unjustified when the investigation was in progress and allegations of forgery and fraud were yet to be examined.
The case arose from an FIR lodged by the appellant alleging that the respondent entered into a criminal conspiracy to grab the property and assets of her father by way of cheating, forging documents, fabricating false evidence, committing fraud, and committing theft. It was also alleged that taking advantage of her father’s weak mental and physical disposition, the complainant influenced him and got him nominated in bank accounts, transferred large sums of money unlawfully, and executed sale deeds of ancestral property at a throwaway price, based on false recitals and forged documents. There was no consideration credited and the entire transaction was fraudulent.
During the investigation, grave discrepancies were found in the circle rates, and the documents were forwarded to the State Forensic Science Laboratory (SFSL) for forensic examination. The investigation later revealed that the questioned document bore forged signatures and that the accused had misappropriated funds by projecting themselves as nominees. Despite this, the High Court, in exercise of powers under Section 482 CrPC, quashed the FIR, holding that allegations were speculative and ingredients of offenses were not made out.
Aggrieved by the decision of the High Court, the appellant filed the current appeal and submits that the High Court interfered in the exercise of its inherent powers and quashed the FIR at the very threshold when investigations were in full swing and vital material was yet to be collected. On the other hand, the respondents supported the High Court’s view and relied on the case of Mir Nagvi Askari vs. CBI [(2006) 15 SCC 643] to buttress that ingredients of forgery were not established.
Hearing the appeal, the bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta noted that the High Court had quashed the FIR without awaiting the outcome of forensic examination, despite being aware that disputed documents had been sent for expert analysis. It held that such exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC was wholly unjustified, as the question whether documents were forged was still under investigation and dependent on expert opinion. The Court further held that reliance placed on Mir Nagvi Askari vs. CBI (supra) was misplaced, as the said judgment was not applicable at a stage where investigation was incomplete.
Further, it was held that the allegations of fraudulent transfers and misappropriation prima facie disclosed offenses, with SFSL reports indicating forged signatures and thus quashing being premature. Accordingly, the court has set aside the impugned judgment and directed the completion of investigation as per law and also clarified that observations were confined to the present proceedings.
Appearance
For petitioner: Mr. Kartikeya Rastogi, D.A.G. Ms. Natasha Dalmia, AOR Ms. Inderdeep Kaur Raina, Adv.
For Respondent:
