Allahabad High Court
Munesh Singh vs State Of U.P. And Another on 17 November, 2020
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 66 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 16064 of 2020 Applicant :- Munesh Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Kumar Rathore,Sanjeev Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State.
This is an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the entire proceedings of Case No. 1148 of 2018, State vs. Ranveer Singh, under Section 420 I.P.C., Police Station Dannahar, District Mainpuri as well as the Revisional Order dated 26.02.2020 passed in Criminal Revision No. 33 of 2018, Munesh Singh vs. State of U.P. and another.
A perusal of the impugned charge sheet shows that there are allegations about forging a will dated 14.12.1990, executed by Pancham Singh relating to his property in favour of the applicant. It is argued that the dispute is one which is essentially civil in nature and O.S. No. 657 of 2012, Ranveer Singh vs. Munesh is pending before the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Mainpuri seeking cancellation of the impugned will. The suit is said to be pending at an infant stage, where issues have not been framed.
This court has perused the impugned charge sheet and the materials in support. It is true that the allegations involved relate to validity of the will dated 14.12.1990 executed by the late Pancham Singh and the validity of the said will is subjudice before the Civil Court. However, the allegations being that the will is a product of forgery, it cannot be said that the dispute is one which is essentially civil in nature. It is a case which has both angles, civil as well as criminal. Both Courts are free to try cases independently of the other as held by the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in M.S. Sheriff and another v. State of Madras and others, AIR 1954 S.C. 397. I had also occasion to consider this question in Pooran Singh and Others vs. State of U.P. and another, decided on 18.01.2019 in Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. No. 12993 of 2004.
In this view of the matter, it cannot be said that the proceedings impugned are liable to be quashed. The prayer to quash the impugned charge sheet is, accordingly, refused.
However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it is provided that if the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 45 days from today and applies for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. For a period of 45 days from today or till the applicant surrenders whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant. However, in case, the applicant does not appear before the court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him.
With the aforesaid directions, the application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 17.11.2020 BKM/-