IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.MMO. No. 133 of 2009. Date of Decision: 10.8.2010. _______________________________________________ Raminder Singh and others. ….Petitioners. Versus. State of H.P. ….Respondent. Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dev Darshan Sud, Judge. Whether approved for reporting1? No. For the petitioners :Mr. K.D.Sood, Advocate. For Respondent. :Ms. Ruma Kaushik, Addl. Advocate General. Dev Darshan Sud, J.(Oral). Heard learned counsel for the parties. It is undisputed before me that the Will which is the subject matter of the criminal proceedings is also the subject matter of determination in a Civil Suit between petitioner-Raminder Singh and the complainant Parminder Singh who are brothers. The allegation made against the petitioners herein is that the Will is forged and, therefore, the petitioners are required to be prosecuted under Sections 420, 468, 471 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code for which purposes F.I.R. No. 121 of 2007 was registered before Police Station, Kandaghat. Whether reporters of the Local papers are allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 Process summoning the petitioners was issued on 3.7.2008 by the Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Kandaghat. A Civil Suit with respect to the same Will was filed in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Kandaghat on 19th November, 2007. Issues have been framed on 24th March, 2009 in the suit and one of the issues for determination is as to whether the Will executed by Smt. Kuldip Kaur is forged or fabricated . Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners places reliance in Sardool Singh and another Vs. Smt. Nasib Kaur, 1987 (Supp) SCC 146 holding: “2. A civil suit between the parties is pending wherein the contention of the respondent is that no Will was executed whereas the contention of the appellants is that a Will has been executed by the testator. A case for grant of probate is also pending in the court of learned District Judge, Rampur. The civil court is therefore seized of the question as regards the validity of the Will. The matter is sub judice in the aforesaid two cases in civil courts. At this juncture the respondent cannot therefore be permitted to institute a criminal prosecution on the allegation that the Will is a forged one. That question will have to be decided by the civil court after recording the evidence and hearing the parties in accordance with law. It would not be proper to permit the respondent to prosecute the appellants on this allegation when the validity of the Will is being tested before a civil court. We, therefore, allow the appeal, set aside the order of the High Court, and quash the criminal proceedings pending in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, Fist Class, Chandigarh in the case entitled Smt. Nasib Kaur V. Sardool Singh. This will not come in the way of instituting appropriate proceedings in future in case the civil court comes to the conclusion that the Will is a forged one. We of course refrain from expressing any opinion as regards genuineness or otherwise of the Will in question as there is no occasion to do so and the question is wide open before the lower courts.” 3 In these circumstances, I find that continuation of criminal proceedings would an abuse of the process of the court. This petition is accordingly allowed. F.I.R. No. 121 of 2007 is quashed. (Dev Darshsn Sud), Judge. August 10, 2010(R)