In a legal development, the Allahabad High Court has issued a landmark ruling in a forgery case, setting a precedent for access to justice in matters involving alleged document fraud. The ruling, delivered by Jusitce Surendra Singh-I, in Criminal Revision of 2023, underscores the judiciary’s commitment to upholding the rule of law and ensuring fair treatment for all parties involved.
The case pertained to an application filed under Section 156 (3) of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) by the revisionist, Vishwanath, against his younger brother, Shivnath, and others. Vishwanath alleged forgery in obtaining a registered will deed by Shivnath, prompting him to seek the intervention of the court to initiate criminal proceedings.
The trial court, however, rejected Vishwanath’s application, citing the civil nature of the dispute. Despite Vishwanath’s assertion of forgery under Sections 420, 467, and 478 of the Indian Penal Code (I.P.C.), the trial court maintained that the matter fell outside its jurisdiction.
In a meticulous analysis of the legal framework, the High Court highlighted the applicability of Section 195 (1) (b) (i) of the Cr.P.C., which restricts the registration of First Information Reports (FIRs) for offenses committed in relation to court proceedings. However, the court emphasized a crucial distinction – the alleged forgery in this case occurred outside the realm of court proceedings, rendering the bar under Section 195 (1) (b) (i) inapplicable.
Quoting the judgment in Sachida Nand Singh vs. State of Bihar (1998) 2 SCC 493, Justice Surendra Singh-I, elucidated, “Even if the clause is capable of two interpretations we are inclined to choose the narrower interpretation for obvious reasons.” This underscores the judiciary’s commitment to interpreting statutes in a manner that upholds justice and prevents potential abuse or manipulation of legal processes.
The High Court further emphasized that Section 195 (1) (b) of the Cr.P.C. does not out rightly prohibit the registration of criminal cases but mandates that the magistrate refrain from taking cognizance without a formal complaint from the court where the alleged forgery occurred.
In light of these considerations, the Allahabad High Court allowed the criminal revision, thereby overturning the trial court’s decision and directing the magistrate to reconsider Vishwanath’s application under Section 156 (3) of the Cr.P.C. The court underscored that its ruling solely addressed the legality of the trial court’s decision and refrained from making any findings on the merits of the case.
Case Name: Vishwanath Vs. State Of U.P.
Case No.: CRIMINAL REVISION No. – 185 of 2023
Bench: Justice Surendra Singh-I
Order dated: 20.03.2024
To get free legal advice: click here
For more legal updates visit our Youtube channel: click here
