Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 17804 of 2021 Applicant :- Ramnaresh Singh And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Surendra Bahadur Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
1. Heard Sri V.P. Srivastava, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri S.B. Singh, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Anil Srivastava, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri U.P. Singh, learned counsel for the State.
2. Learned counsel for the first informant informs the Court that he has filed his Vakalatnama in the office on 22.10.2021. Office is directed to trace out the same and place it on record and make a note in the order-sheet.
3. This anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants- Ramnaresh Singh and Randheer Singh, seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 506 of 2021, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 469, 471 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Banda, during pendency of trial.
4. Before dilating the prosecution case, it would be relevant to mention relationship between the parties.
i. Smt. Chhoti was married to Bhura Singh. They had two sons and five daughters.
ii. The dispute is with regards to one son and one daughter who are Babu Ram Singh & Ms. Meera Singh.
iii. Babu Ram Singh was unmarried. Ms. Meera Singh was married to Rambali Singh.
iv. Rambali Singh had two other brothers namely Ramnaresh Singh and Randheer.
v. Ms. Meera Singh from her wedlock had a son named Vijay Vikram Singh. As of now, the relationship till this stage is only relevant for the present matter.
5. The prosecution case as per the first information report which has been lodged on the basis of an application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. on 05.08.2021 naming the applicants and Vijay Pratap Singh which is dated 06.07.2021 is that Babu Ram died on 20.02.2012 which is registered in the Government records and a death certificate dated 05.03.2012 was issued to the said effect. Rambali Singh had two younger brothers and Vijay Pratap Singh one of the accused is the younger brother of Sadhu of Randheer Singh. Babu Ram Singh had property in the village in his name. In the year 2014, Ramnaresh Singh (the applicant no.1), Randheer Singh (the applicant no.2) and Vijay Pratap Singh got a forged death certificate of Babu Ram Singh prepared from Nagar Palika Parishad, Banda for which an application was given by Vijay Pratap Singh along with an affidavit and it was shown that Babu Ram Singh was his chacha and he died in Banda in his house which is false and incorrect. On the basis of the said forged death certificate which was got issued in the year 2014 and on the basis of a forged will of Babu Ram Singh with an intention to grab his property, Ramnaresh Singh and Randheer Singh filed mutation cases before the Naib Tehsildar, Pailani numbered as Case No. 265 of 2017 (Randheer Singh vs. Babu Ram Singh) and Case No. 266 of 2017 ( Ramnaresh Singh vs. Babu Ram Singh) by enclosing the forged death certificate in it. The said three accused persons with an intention to have a wrongful gain had got the forged certificate issued from Banda. The said two cases are still pending in the concerned court and the said forged death certificate has been sealed by the court on an application of the first informant. The first information report is thus being lodged against the accused persons for preparing a forged death certificate of Babu Ram Singh with an intention to grab his property. The first informant has now come to know about the said acts and is contacting the authorities for appropriate inquiry. She is quite old and ill and is not able to do pairvi properly.
6. Learned counsel for the applicants argued that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that in so far as it relates to the proceedings of mutation, the same are still pending before the concerned court in which the first informant has put in her appearance and is contesting them. The said will is a duly registered document. The same has been got registered in the year 2011 in the office of Sub-Registrar, Banda Sadar, Banda. There is no proceedings initiated by the first informant in so far as it relates to Vijay Pratap Singh who has also been bequeathed certain properties in the said will. The first informant is raising the dispute only with regards to proceedings of mutation as have been initiated by the applicants. It is argued that the present dispute at best is a civil dispute. It is further argued that in so far as the allegation of getting a forged death certificate is concerned, even the first informant does not dispute the fact that the date of the death of Babu Ram Singh is 20.02.2012 and the same is shown in the death certificate. The applicants have no criminal history as stated in para 42 of the affidavit.
7. Learned counsel for the first informant and learned counsel for the State have vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and argued that in the death certificate which has been surreptitiously obtained, the place of death of Babu Ram Singh has been shown to be Banda which is an colourful exercise by the accused persons just to show that he was in Banda as the said wills are shown to be registered in Banda and thus to synchronize the same, they have shown the place of death in Banda but as a matter of fact, he died in Prakash Bamhauri which falls in district Chattarpur, Madhya Pradesh. It is argued that the said will on the application of the first informant has been sealed by the concerned court ceased with the cases of mutation. It is further argued that the said two registered wills are also documents which are fabricated documents in so far as the signatures of the witnesses therein are manipulated and is a very fine handy work during their execution. It is argued that although no suit for cancellation of the said wills have been filed till date, but the same are being challenged in the proceedings of mutation before the concerned tehsildar and if an order is passed in favour of the first informant therein then the same would be a fact of falsifying the recital in the will. It is argued that the applicants are involved in the present case and the present application for anticipatory bail be rejected.
8. Learned counsel for the State also opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and adopted the arguments of learned counsel for the first informant.
9. After having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the present dispute relates to will which was executed by Babu Ram Singh in the year 2011. The first information report has been lodged on the basis of an application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. which is dated 06.07.2021 which was moved after about 10 years of the execution of the will. Even the proceedings for mutation were initiated in the year 2017 and even from the same, the said application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. was moved after about four years. Admittedly, no suit for cancellation of the said wills has been filed by the first informant. In so far as the death certificate is concerned, the date of actual death of Babu Ram Singh is the same mentioned therein which is actual date of death. There is no change in the same. The place of death as being different may not have any effect on the facts of the case.
10. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, considering the nature of accusation, the applicants are entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.
11. In the event of arrest of the applicants- Ramnaresh Singh and Randheer Singh, involved in Case Crime No. 506 of 2021, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 469, 471 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Banda, they shall be released on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report, if any, under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court on their furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police office as and when required;
(ii) the applicants shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police office;
(iii) the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if they have passport the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.
12. In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants.
13. The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation of the present case in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this order independently without being prejudice by any observation made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicants.
14. The applicants are directed to produce a copy of this order before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned within ten days from today, who shall ensure the compliance of present order.
15. The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the applicant(s) along with a self attested identity proof of the said person(s) (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number(s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.
16. The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 23.10.2021 AS Rathore (Samit Gopal,J.)