VIJAY KUMAR PANDEY Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application under section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by Vijay Kumar Pandey, Balram Pandey, Tribhuvan Pandey, Madhuri Pandey and Poonam Pandey against State of U.P. and Santosh Kumar Pandey, with a prayer for quashing the summoning order dated 27.2.2019 passed by ACJM-V, Varanasi as well as entire proceeding of criminal case No. 3118 of 2017, under Section 420 I.P.C., P.S. Badagaon, District Varanasi, pending in the Court of A.C.J.M., Court No. 5, Varanasi.

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. representing the State.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicants argued that it was a case, wherein, accusation was not apparent on record. The alleged will-deed was registered will-deed, executed by father Sri Ram, in favour of applicants. It was not a result of deceit or fraud. Sri Ram has previously filed a report against Santosh Kumar Pandey for assault made by him on Sri Ram. Prior to this execution of deed, a partition suit was filed by Santosh Kumar Pandey, in year 2015, against Sri Ram and others, as Civil Suit No. 719 of 2015, pending before Special Judge (J.D.), Varanasi, wherein, contention of complainant Santosh Kumar Pandey was that, that Sri Ram, who is father, was not amenable to him. Sri Ram Pandey, who was an ex-military personnel and was old aged person, had wilfully executed will-deed, by way of registered will-deed, in favour of applicants and no suit for cancellation of same, was filed by Santosh Kumar Pandey. Though, in previously instituted suit, an application for amended relief, was moved and by now, it has not been adjudicated that alleged registered will-deed was a result of fraud. Hence, for the same registered will-deed, this complaint has been filed wherein applicants have been summoned for offence of forgery, punishable under section 420 of I.P.C. Whereas, it was not there. Complainant, in his statement recorded under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. and his witnesses under Section 202 of Cr.P.C., has said about share of Santosh Kumar Pandey, in agricultural land and property of Sri Ram Pandey, for which he had executed registered will-deed in favour of applicants. This was wilful execution of registered will-deed by deceased Sri Ram and there was no fraud or forgery. Locus of forgery and accusation, was of Sri Ram, who was surviving for ten days after this registration of deed but he has not filed any complaint regarding above alleged fraud. Complainant, in his own suit, filed as Civil Suit No. 719 of 2015, has said that Sri Ram was not amenable to him and even he was living separately, then Sri Ram, who was residing with applicants, did not permit complainant to marry his daughter from above parental house, for which marriage was solemnized from the house of his in-laws. Relations with Santosh Kumar Pandey was so strained as has been written by Sri Ram, in registered will-deed and it was the reason for execution of this registered will-deed. Hence, there was no offence at all. The next accusation was that last rituals were performed and complainant was not informed. Admittedly, Sri Ram died at his parental house and his dead body was taken and last rituals were performed. Complainant was not looking after his father, was fully aware but this has been developed by him and the witnesses are under collusion with him. Moreso, this amounts no offence. Performance of last rituals by few of sons leaving behind one son, is not offence in I.P.C . But this summoning is passed on above situation, which is apparently misuse of process of law. Hence, this application with above prayer.