Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
200/2010 on 5 January, 2011
Author: K.J. Sengupta
Bench: K.J. Sengupta
1 2011 F.M.A. 200 of 2010 With CAN 10275 of 2009 Mr. Santi Pada Pahari, Mr. Tapan Kr. Mahapatra...................For the appellants/ petitioners.
Mr. Ashok Sarkar, Mr. Monotosh Chakraborty...................For the State.
In terms of the judgment and order passed earlier by the Division Bench, the appeal itself is taken up for hearing.
We have heard the learned Counsel for the appellant and Mr. Sarkar, learned Counsel for the State and have gone through the impugned order of the learned trial Judge dated 20th March, 2008.
It appears that the learned Judge has been pleased to dismiss the writ petition on the ground of pendency of criminal proceedings. In our considered view, with respect to the learned trial Judge, the real issue involved in the writ petition was not addressed to, much less coming to a conclusion.
After going through the statements and averments made in the writ petition we have been able to ascertain that the real grievance of the appellants/writ petitioners is that the appellants/petitioners in bonafide belief presented a document for registration using some stamp papers. Those stamp papers are alleged to have been forged and, as such, a full fledged investigation has to be conducted and a number of documents are required to be seized.
It is an admitted position that on the face of presentation of the document, the same was registered by the registering authority and registration of the document is complete. The petitioners, after completion of the document, demanded return of the original as well as supply of certified copy of the registered document.
We are of the view, taking note of the submission of Mr. Sarkar that question of returning the original document, under any circumstances, does not and cannot arise for, those documents 2 might have been seized or might be seized in connection with the criminal investigation as well as trial, if required to be initiated. But, at the same time, the appellants/petitioners should not be deprived of obtaining the certified copy of the registered instrument. Factum of lawful registration is admitted, but the document on which registration has been done may be forged and that can be taken care of by passing appropriate order.
Accordingly, we are of the view that the following order will subserve the interest of all the parties.
On depositing an amount equivalent to the aggregate value of the stamp papers used for the purpose of registration with the registering authority and upon proper application being made for obtaining certified copy and on payment of proper fees for the same, the registering authority concerned shall supply the certified copy of the document. The said certified copy shall be used for all practical purposes. Supply of certified copy shall be made within fortnight from the date of making deposit. If no deposit is made within four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, then the issue will be a closed chapter and the judgment and order of the learned trial Judge will stand revived.
The aforesaid amount shall be kept deposited till the investigation is complete and the trial is over, ideally in a term deposit, if possible. If it is found in the trial that the stamp papers in question are forged, then the amount so to be deposited with the registering authority, shall be handed over to the appropriate authority, viz. the State Government. In the event, it is found that the stamp papers are genuine, obviously the amount so to be deposited, shall be returned to the appellants/petitioners.
Accordingly, we set aside the judgment and order of the learned trial Judge. However, we make it clear that this order will not create any special right or equity in the criminal proceedings, as far as defence is concerned.
With the above observations, the appeal and connected application, if any, stand disposed of. There will be no order as to costs.
Urgent Xerox certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the applicants.
(K.J. SENGUPTA,J.) 3 (ASIM KUMAR RAY,J)