IPC 471 - The Legal Chamber

Supreme Court Shields Daughters-in-Law from Criminal Case Over Property Will

28Aug

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Shields Daughters-in-Law from Criminal Case Over Property Will

The Supreme Court quashed criminal proceedings under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, and 471 IPC, ruling the allegations did not prima facie constitute the alleged offences. Relying on Bhajan Lal, it held that criminal process cannot be used to settle civil disputes, as it amounts to an abuse of the court's process. Facts Of The Case: A testator, Shri Ram Baksh Dubey, executed an unregistered will in 1993 bequeathing his property to his four daughters-in-law, apprehensive that his third son, Ashish Kumar, would squander the estate. After the testator’s death in 1994, Ashish Kumar sold his purported share to the complainant, Balram, via a registered sale deed. The daughters-in-law, unaware of this sale, successfully obtained a mutation order in their favor based on the will. When Balram inte...

Can’t Reopen Closed Cases Without New Proof: Supreme Court’s Landmark Ruling for Sportspersons

The Supreme Court quashed the FIR, ruling the allegations of forgery and cheating did not disclose the essential ingredients of Sections 420, 468, or 471 IPC. It held that continuing the prosecution, after prior exoneration by competent authorities without new evidence, constituted a clear abuse of the legal process. Facts Of The Case: In 2022, a private complaint was filed by Nagaraja M.G. alleging that badminton players Chirag Sen and Lakshya Sen, their parents, and their coach, Vimal Kumar, had conspired to falsify the players’ dates of birth to gain illegal entry into age-restricted tournaments. The complaint was based primarily on an alleged 1996 GPF nomination form. Following a magistrate's order under Section 156(3) of the CrPC, the Bengaluru Police registered an FIR for offences ...

Supreme Court Clarifies Section 195 CrPC Doesn’t Protect Post-Proceeding Forgery”: Courts Records Safety

The Supreme Court ruled that Section 195 CrPC does not bar prosecution for tampering with court records after proceedings conclude, as such acts no longer affect "proceedings in court" under Section 195(1)(b). It held that fabricating documents in record rooms post-withdrawal constitutes standalone offences under IPC, not requiring court-sanctioned complaints. The judgment clarified that Section 195 applies only when offences directly impact live judicial proceedings or documents in active court custody, distinguishing between administrative record-keeping and judicial administration of justice. The Court affirmed that FIRs remain valid for post-proceeding forgeries. Facts Of The Case: The case originated from a 2005 FIR lodged by the Registrar of Bharuch District Court against Parshotta...