1 The present application is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashment of the FIR being No.I-11199050220914 of 2022 dated 12.09.2022, registered with Valiya Police Station, District Bharuch, for the offences punishable under Sections 420 , 465 , 467 , 468 , 471 and 120B of the Page 1 of 18 Uploaded by M.M.MIRZA(HC01407) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:12:41 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/18984/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 12/03/2026 undefined Indian Penal Code , against four accused persons, wherein the present applicants are arraigned as accused Nos.2 and 3, being the son and wife of the main accused No.1. As per the allegations made in the FIR, which was lodged at the instance of Kersi Dorabji Harmasji Variyava (Parsi), it is stated that the agricultural lands namely (1) Khata No.255 (Old Block No.233A, New Block No.075) admeasuring Hec. R.A. Sq. Mtrs. 04-98-61, (2) Khata No.277 (Old Block No.233B, New Block No.074) admeasuring Hec. R.A. Sq. Mtrs. 00- 37-46 and (3) Khata No.277 (Old Block No.007, New Block No.350) admeasuring Hec. R.A. Sq. Mtrs. 00-41- 05, situated at Village Itakala, Taluka Valiya, District Bharuch, originally belonged to Bhikhaji Ardesar Bharucha, who was the maternal uncle of the complainant. It is alleged that accused No.1, in connivance with the Talati-cum-Mantri of Village Itakala, took wrongful advantage of the absence of the complainant's maternal uncle and produced a fabricated revenue receipt (pawti) dated 30.09.1986 before the revenue authority, and thereby obtained agricultural rights over the aforesaid lands vide mutation entry No.1096 dated 06.08.1991.

1.1 It is further alleged that the original owner Bhikhaji Ardesar Bharucha died on 18.09.1992 at Navsari, and thereafter accused No.1 created a forge Will dated 30.12.1993, showing the Page 2 of 18 Uploaded by M.M.MIRZA(HC01407) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:12:41 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/18984/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 12/03/2026 undefined signatures of two witnesses, namely Mohanlal J. Varde and Manubhai Chimanlal Solanki, and identifying the thumb impression of the deceased Bhikhaji Ardesar Bharucha. It is also alleged that on 10.03.2001, accused No.1 submitted an application for mutation of revenue entry and without issuance or service of notice under Section 135D of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code to the complainant or any other heirs, mutation entry No.1453 came to be entered stating that the deceased had no Class-I or Class-II heirs, and accordingly the name of accused No.1 was mutated on the basis of the said false Will.

1.2 It is further alleged that on 20.03.1995, on a Rs.50 Non-Judicial stamp paper purchased by accused No.1, a power of attorney was prepared in the name of Bhikhaji Ardesar Bharucha, which was later used before the Gujarat Electricity Board Limited for the purpose of enhancement of electricity power. It is further alleged that on 10.03.2001, accused No.1 submitted an application before the Talati-cum-Mantri, Itakala Group Gram Panchayat, for mutation of his name, whereupon the Gram Panchayat issued notice under Section 135D(2) and a panchnama dated 14.08.2001 was drawn stating that the deceased Page 3 of 18 Uploaded by M.M.MIRZA(HC01407) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:12:41 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/18984/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 12/03/2026 undefined Bhikhaji had no issues and no Class-I or Class-II heirs, and thereby accused No.1 wrongfully obtained ownership of the agricultural lands belonging to the complainant's maternal uncle.

1.3 Thereafter, in the year 2003, accused No.1 prepared documents for transferring the said agricultural lands, whereby Survey No.75 was transferred in the name of applicant No.1 (son of accused No.1) and Survey No.74 was transferred in the name of applicant No.2 (wife of accused No.1), and consequently the lands came to be mutated in the names of the present applicants. It is alleged in the FIR that though the present applicants had knowledge of the alleged forgery committed at the instance of accused No.1, including the fabrication of revenue records, thumb impression of the deceased and the power of attorney, the applicants took advantage of the same and got the lands transferred in their names. The said FIR is the subject matter of challenge before this Court in the present application.

2 Heard learned Senior Advocate Mr. S.I. Nanavati with learned advocate Mr. Vandan Baxi for the applicant Nos.1 and 2, learned advocate Mr. Jay Thakkar for the respondent No.2 and learned APP Mr. Raval for Page 4 of 18 Uploaded by M.M.MIRZA(HC01407) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:12:41 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/18984/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 12/03/2026 undefined the respondent No.1.

3 Learned Senior Advocate Mr. S.I. Nanavati submits that the present applicants have been falsely implicated in the FIR, as they have neither played any role in fabricating the power of attorney or the Will, nor in forging the thumb impression of the deceased. It is further submitted by learned Senior Advocate Mr. Nanavati that at the time of the death of Bhikhaji Ardesar Bharucha, applicant No.1 was about 12 years of age. It is therefore contended that applicant No.1 was not aware of the alleged forgery committed by his father, and the subsequent transfer of the property, which is alleged to have been obtained by the father through forged documents, was treated as a family arrangement. It is submitted that in the absence of any specific allegation against the present applicants, the impugned FIR amounts to an abuse of the process of law. Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Nanavati further submits that only by invoking Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, the applicants have been arraigned as accused, and merely because they are the son and wife of accused No.1, an attempt has been made to implicate them in the offence.

3.1 By relying upon the decision of the Apex Court Page 5 of 18 Uploaded by M.M.MIRZA(HC01407) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:12:41 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/18984/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 12/03/2026 undefined in Sheila Sebastian vs. R. Jawaharaj & Anr., Criminal Appeal Nos.359-360 of 2010, it is submitted that an allegation of forgery can be made only against the person who has dishonestly or fraudulently made the document. It is therefore submitted that since the present applicants have not played any role in forging the documents, the impugned FIR is nothing but harassment, and hence the same deserves to be quashed and set aside.

4 Per contra, learned advocate Mr. Jay Thakkar appearing for the respondent submits that in the year 2003 the lands were transferred in favour of the present applicants, which indicates that accused Nos.2 and 3 had knowledge of the alleged fraud, inasmuch as out of six lands, only three lands came to be transferred in the names of accused Nos.2 and 3 by way of a family arrangement. It is submitted by learned advocate Mr. Thakkar that the manner in which the lands were distributed demonstrates that accused No.1, with a view to secure the interests of the present applicants, transferred the lands from his share to the applicants herein. Learned advocate Mr. Thakkar further submits that the investigation has not yet been completed, and due to the interim protection granted by this Court, the investigation Page 6 of 18 Uploaded by M.M.MIRZA(HC01407) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:12:41 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/18984/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 12/03/2026 undefined could not proceed further. In that view of the matter, it is submitted that the present application deserves to be dismissed.

5 Learned APP Mr. Ronak Raval appearing for the State submits that due to the stay granted by this Court, the investigation could not be completed. It is further submitted that the present applicants have started threatening the witnesses of the prosecution case. It is submitted that on 28.10.2022, applicant No.1 visited the premises of Jitu Mohanlal Varde, who is the son of Mohanlal Jivanlal Varde, whose name has been shown as a witness to the alleged false Will prepared by accused No.1. It is alleged that the said witness was conveyed that if any inquiry is made with regard to the signature on the Will, he should support the Will produced by the accused, failing which he would face dire consequences. Learned APP Mr. Raval further submits that copies of the CCTV footage from the shop of the son of the witness have been collected, along with the complaint lodged by the son of the witness, in support of the allegations of threatening the witness. It is therefore submitted by the learned APP MR. Raval that the present applicants, despite having knowledge of the alleged forgery, permitted the transfer of the lands in their favour and have also extended threats to the Page 7 of 18 Uploaded by M.M.MIRZA(HC01407) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:12:41 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/18984/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 12/03/2026 undefined witnesses. In that background, it is submitted by the learned APP Mr. Raval that no interference is required by this Court, and the investigating agency may be permitted to carry out the investigation in a fair and proper manner.

6 Having considered the submissions made by the learned advocates for the respective parties, this Court has referred to the decision of the Apex Court in M/s. Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra and Others , reported in (2021) 19 SCC 401, wherein the Apex Court has laid down the guidelines governing the exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The relevant guidelines are reproduced hereinbelow:

NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/18984/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 12/03/2026 undefined 6.1 In view of the aforesaid guidelines, the question that remains for consideration before this Court is whether the case of the present applicants falls within any of the categories laid down by the Apex Court.

7 Admittedly, accused No.1, who is the father of applicant No.1 and the husband of applicant No.2, is alleged to have created a forged Will, fabricated the thumb impression of the deceased Bhikhaji Ardesar Bharucha, and prepared a false power of attorney, and on the basis of such documents got the lands transferred in their favour. It is further alleged that in connivance with the Talati, the notice under Section 135D of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code was not properly served, and a panchnama was drawn stating that there were no Class-I or Class-II heirs of the deceased. The role attributed to the present applicants in the FIR is that the lands obtained on the basis of the said forged Will were subsequently transferred in the names of applicant Nos.1 and 2. It is settled law that criminal conspiracy can also be proved by circumstantial evidence, as direct evidence in such matters is rarely available. The prosecution can therefore establish the existence of conspiracy on the basis of surrounding circumstances. Undoubtedly, if it is found that an Page 10 of 18 Uploaded by M.M.MIRZA(HC01407) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:12:41 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/18984/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 12/03/2026 undefined unlawful act has been committed by accused No.1 in conspiracy with accused Nos.2 and 3, all the accused persons can be tried together.

7.1 It has been contended that applicant No.1 was about 12 years old at the time of the death of the deceased. It is not in dispute that the deceased died in the year 1991, whereas the lands were transferred by accused No.1 in favour of accused Nos.2 and 3 in the year 2003. The investigation is yet to be concluded. However, during the course of investigation, the statement of Mohanlal J. Varde was recorded on 16.12.2022, wherein it has been stated that accused No.1 had threatened him and informed that if any person from the revenue department or any other authority approaches him, he should not resile from the signature appearing on the Will. From the recitals of the complaint, it cannot be said that the allegations do not constitute any offence. While deciding a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Court would not embark upon an inquiry to determine whether the allegations made in the FIR are true or otherwise. Where the allegations in the complaint prima facie disclose the commission of the alleged offences, the FIR cannot be quashed.

NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/18984/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 12/03/2026 undefined 7.2 It is contended by learned Senior Advocate Mr. S.I. Nanavati that the SIT in its report had permitted filing of a complaint only against accused No.1. However, upon referring to the SIT reference dated 07.09.2022, this Court does not find any such observation. Learned Senior Advocate Mr. S.I. Nanavati has also sought to emphasize the aspect of delay. However, in the opinion of this Court, mere delay in filing the complaint cannot be a ground for quashing the FIR under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, particularly when the complaint contains specific averments constituting the alleged offences against the applicants. It has further been submitted by the learned senior advocate Mr. S.I. Nanavati that the applicants had no knowledge of the alleged acts, however, such a contention cannot be examined at this stage when the investigation is still in progress and the chargesheet is yet to be filed against the applicants.

8 This Court has referred the following decisions rendered by the Apex Court:

NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/18984/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 12/03/2026 undefined 12 Considering the overall circumstances of the case and the observations made by the Apex Court, once this Court has come to the conclusion that no case is made out for quashment of the FIR, continuation or extension of the interim relief would not be permissible, and therefore the request made in that regard is not acceded to.

13 Resultantly, the present application stands dismissed. Interim relief granted earlier stands vacated.

(M. K. THAKKER,J) M.M.MIRZA Page 18 of 18 Uploaded by M.M.MIRZA(HC01407) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:12:41 IST 2026