Full Judgment Text
2026 INSC 252
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S). OF 2026
(Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No(s). 3533 of 2024)
SHARLA BAZLIEL ….APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
BALDEV THAKUR
AND OTHERS ….RESPONDENT(S)
WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S). OF 2026
(Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No(s). 2498 of 2025)
J U D G M E N T
Mehta, J.
1. Heard.
2. Leave granted.
1
3. The appellant, Sharla Bazliel , being the original
complainant and the State of Himachal Pradesh are
before us for assailing the judgment and final order
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
NEETU KHAJURIA
Date: 2026.03.17
18:26:37 IST
Reason:
1
Hereinafter referred to as appellant-complainant.
1
th
dated 8 January, 2024 passed by the High Court of
2
Himachal Pradesh at Shimla in Cr. MMO No. 50 of
2023 whereby the learned Single Judge of the High
Court allowed the petition filed by the respondents-
accused under Section 482 of Code of Criminal
3
Procedure, 1973 and quashed the proceedings of FIR
th
No. 8/22 dated 26 August, 2022 lodged by the
appellant-complainant at Police Station State CID,
Shimla for the offences punishable under Sections
420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of the Indian
4
Penal Code, 1860 .
4. It was inter alia alleged in the FIR that the
respondents-accused herein, namely, Baldev
Thakur, Daljit Singh and Jienpuri Kamsuon, entered
into a criminal conspiracy to grab the property and
other articles of the appellant-complainant’s father,
Dr. G.B. Bazliel, by way of extortion, cheating, forging
documents, fabricating false evidence, fraud and
committing theft. The appellant-complainant alleged
in the FIR that she is the adopted daughter and legal
heir of Dr. G.R. Bazliel. Her family owned ancestral
2
Hereinafter referred to as ‘High Court’
3
For short ‘CrPC’.
4
For short ‘IPC’
2
property admeasuring 51.2 bighas in Village Katli,
Patwar Circle Dhagog, Mashobra, District Shimla,
H.P. The said agricultural land belonged to her
grandfather, Dr. I.R. Bazliel, and passed on to her
father after the death of her grandfather in the year
1986. She has been in possession of the property
since 1980. Her mother passed away in the year
2013, pursuant to which her father developed severe
depression associated with other health issues. The
appellant-complainant stated that she had been
taking care of her father until the year 2016.
5. Around that period, respondent No. 2-Daljit
Singh (who had a criminal background), introduced
her father to a woman named Jienpuri Kamsuon
(respondent No. 3). The appellant-complainant
strongly objected to her father’s relationship with
respondent No. 3 Jienpuri Kamsuon considering his
age and health condition. However, the respondents-
accused did not desist and, taking advantage of her
father’s weak mental and physical disposition,
influenced him to sever all ties with the family,
thereby rendering him completely isolated and
vulnerable. By practising such fraudulent
inducement, her father was persuaded to appoint
3
respondent No. 2-Daljit Singh as a nominee in his
bank accounts and, in this manner, the entire family
property was transferred to respondent No. 1- Baldev
Thakur.
6.
The appellant-complainant was residing at
Delhi in connection with her employment. Upon
coming to know about the illegal design of the
respondents-accused to grab the ancestral
properties, she called her father on phone and
objected to the transfers. She told her father that if
he was insisting upon the sale of the properties, at
least her own share and the share of her aunts
should first be set apart, and only thereafter should
the property be sold by following the due legal
th
process. She alleged that on 9 March, 2017, a sum
of Rs. 93 lakhs was transferred from her father’s UCO
Bank account to the bank account of respondent No.
2-Daljit Singh. The major part of this amount, i.e.,
nearly Rs. 65 lakhs, comprised the savings of the
appellant-complainant’s late mother (Dr. Yvonne
Bazliel), which had been credited to her father’s bank
st
account on 21 March, 2013 soon after her mother’s
death by encashing a fixed deposit. Another transfer
th
of Rs. 25 lakhs was made on 9 March, 2017, from
4
her father’s UCO Bank account to the account of
respondent No. 2-Daljit Singh. In this manner, a total
sum of Rs. 1.18 crores was transferred from her
father’s bank accounts to respondent No. 2-Daljit
Singh without being supported by any lawful
transaction or dealing between him and the
appellant-complainant’s father so as to justify such
huge money transfers.
7. It was further alleged that the respondents-
accused conspired together to manage the sale of the
family land admeasuring 49 bighas and 17 biswas in
favour of respondent No. 1-Baldev Thakur by way of
a registered Sale Deed No. 366/2017 for a purported
sale consideration of Rs. 3.90 crores. For effecting
this sale, the property was shown to be the self-
acquired property of her father, contrary to the
factual position as reflected in the revenue records.
The sale was made at a throwaway price, far below
the basic land rate, and by recording a totally false
recital that her father had obtained NOC from all
family members and legal heirs. It was specifically
alleged that NOC had never been given by any family
member consenting to the sale of the family land.
5
8. She came to know about the death of her father
through social media. It was alleged by the appellant-
complainant that her father died under mysterious
circumstances in Hotel Twin Towers at Kufri, Shimla
owned by respondent No. 1-Baldev Thakur. She tried
to contact respondent No. 3-Jienpuri Kamsuon to
find out the details but to no avail. After the death of
her father, respondent No. 1-Baldev Thakur took
possession of the family land and the house. She
could not even retrieve her personal belongings,
th
important documents and jewellery. On 4 March,
2022, respondent No. 2-Daljit Singh approached
UCO Bank claiming to be the nominee of her father
and closed his savings account and got transferred
an amount of Rs 5,74,526/- (Rupees five lakh
seventy-four thousand five hundred and twenty-six)
into his own account. She checked her father’s bank
accounts and was shocked to find that not a single
Rupee towards consideration for the two sale deeds
of 2017 and 2019 had been credited to any of the
bank accounts operated by her father. She suspected
that these transfers had been fraudulently staged by
the accused persons acting in conspiracy with the
intention to grab the entire property, both movable as
6
well as immovable, of her father and those owned by
the family. Respondent No. 2 – Daljit Singh
fraudulently managed to transfer the money
amounting to Rs.1,23,74,526/-, to which the
appellant-complainant’s family was entitled, into his
account at UCO Bank, Vidhan Sabha. Her father’s
two firearms also went missing after his death.
9. Based on the aforesaid allegations, FIR No. 8 of
th
2022 dated 26 August, 2022 came to be registered
at Police Station State CID, Shimla for offences
punishable under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471
and 120-B IPC and investigation was commenced.
10. The respondents-accused nominated in the FIR
filed the subject petition under Section 482 of CrPC
seeking quashing of the aforesaid FIR. In the course
of hearing of the quashing petition, the Investigating
rd
Officer filed a status report dated 3 July, 2023
specifically mentioning that there was a grave
discrepancy between the rates at which the lands
were purchased and the circle rates prevailing at the
relevant time. The rates portrayed in the sale deeds
were far lower than the prevailing circle rates for the
area in question. The said discrepancy was flagged to
highlight the element of fraud practiced by
7
respondent No. 1-Baldev Thakur and others in
preparing the sale documents, particularly, the
documents relating to circle rates of the land. The
Investigating Officer forwarded the questioned
5
documents to the State Forensic Science Laboratory ,
Junga, Himachal Pradesh for forensic document
th
examination on 27 February, 2023.
th
11. The SFSL reports dated 27 June, 2024 and
st
31 August, 2024 have been placed on record along
with the reply filed by the State in Criminal Appeal @
SLP(Crl.) No. 3533 of 2024, as per which the
documents nominating respondent No. 2-Daljit
Singh as the nominee of the appellant-complainant’s
father and the document relating to the closure of the
bank account of the appellant-complainant’s mother
were found to be bearing forged signatures. The
report specifically states that the admitted
specimen/signatures of the appellant-complainant’s
father do not match the questioned signatures. The
investigation further disclosed a marked discrepancy
between the land rates mentioned in the sale deeds
and the circle rates notified by the Government,
5
Hereinafter, referred to as the ‘SFSL’.
8
thereby establishing fraud in the circle-rate
documents used for registration of the sale deeds. It
was consequently found that respondent No. 1-
Baldev Thakur, by undervaluing the property on the
.
basis of false circle-rate documents, paid only Rs
32,04,000 towards stamp duty and registration
charges instead of the legally payable stamp duty @
Rs. 67,91,241, thereby causing a loss of Rs. 35,87,242
to the Government exchequer. In view of the SFSL
th st
reports dated 26 June, 2024 and 31 August, 2024
and the material collected during investigation in FIR
No. 8/2022, the investigating agency concluded that
respondent Nos. 1 to 3 (Baldev Thakur, Daljit Singh
and Jienpuri Kamsuon) had committed offences of
forgery and cheating by forging the signatures of the
appellant-complainant’s father and fraudulently
projecting themselves as his nominees. In this
manner, they misappropriated the monies from the
bank accounts of the appellant-complainant’s father.
As stated above, the criminal petitions filed by the
respondents-accused under Section 482 CrPC stand
th
allowed by the order dated 8 January,2024 passed
by the High court in Cr.MMO No. 50 of 2023 whereby
the FIR was quashed.
9
12. Being aggrieved, the appellant-complainant as
well as the State of Himachal Pradesh are before us
by way of these appeals with special leave.
13. We have heard and considered the submissions
advanced by learned counsel for the parties and have
carefully gone through the impugned order as well as
the reply filed by the State.
14. On a perusal of the impugned order, we find
that the High Court interfered in exercise of its
inherent powers and quashed the FIR at the very
threshold when investigation was in full swing and
vital material was yet to be collected.
15. The High Court recorded that the necessary
ingredients of fraud, misrepresentation or forgery
were not made out from the allegations set out in the
FIR. The High Court also held that the FIR had been
lodged on the basis of speculations and that such
allegations were not sufficient to constitute
cognizable offences. With these findings, the High
Court proceeded to quash the entire proceedings of
the FIR.
16. We may observe that where allegations of
forgery are set out in the FIR and Investigating
Agency has undertaken the exercise of getting the
10
disputed documents examined through the
handwriting expert, an order quashing the FIR
without awaiting the outcome of the handwriting
expert’s report would be totally unjustified.
17.
While deciding the quashing petitions, the
learned Single Judge took note of the fact that the
relevant documents had been taken into possession
and had been sent to the SFSL for analysis. However,
this vital aspect of the matter was completely glossed
over by the learned Single Judge while quashing the
FIR. Once the Court was apprised that investigation
into the genuineness of the signatures on the
disputed/questioned documents was being
undertaken and the signatures were in the process of
being analysed by the SFSL, there was no reason
whatsoever for the High Court to have proceeded to
quash the FIR by exercising jurisdiction under
Section 482 CrPC.
18. Resultantly, we are of the firm opinion that the
High Court prematurely quashed and terminated the
proceedings arising out of the FIR filed by the
appellant-complainant despite clear allegations
establishing the offences of fraud, falsification of
documents, forgery and criminal breach of trust. So
11
far as the observation made by the High Court that
the appellant had earlier filed FIR against her own
father is concerned, it may be noted that the said FIR
was in relation to an entirely different allegation,
namely that her father had attempted to usurp the
property of her grandfather by fabricating his
signatures.
19. The High Court relied on this Court’s decision
6
in Mir Nagvi Askari v. CBI, and observed that the
prosecution is required to prove that the accused had
forged the document by creating a false document.
20. We feel that the reliance placed by the High
Court on the aforesaid judgment to quash the FIR,
despite taking note of the fact that the Investigating
Agency had sought the report of the handwriting
expert, was wholly unjustified. The questioned
documents having already been forwarded for
examination, the proof of forgery would evidently
depend upon the outcome of the comparison to be
conducted by the handwriting expert. Thus, the
aspects relating to the creation of false documents
and the commission of forgery were still under
6
(2009) 15 SCC 643.
12
investigation when the High Court prematurely
proceeded to quash the FIR.
21. As a matter of fact, as per the specific averments
made in the Criminal Appeal @ SLP (Crl.) No. 2498 of
2025, filed on behalf of the State of Himachal
Pradesh, the SFSL report has been received which
concludes that the signatures on the questioned
documents are facsimile stamps i.e., not the
handwritten signatures of the father of respondent
No. 4 (appellant-complainant). Apparently, thus the
investigation has resulted into credible evidence
establishing that the documents on the strength
whereof the properties were transferred in favour of
the accused bore forged signatures of the appellant-
complainant’s father, namely, Dr. G.B. Bazliel.
22. We further find that the judgment in Mir Nagvi
Askari , relied upon by the High Court, was
(supra)
neither relevant nor applicable to the facts of the
present case. Since the report of the handwriting
expert had not yet been received, it was premature to
record any finding on falsification of documents and
forgery. In such circumstances, the prosecution of
the accused persons could not have been stifled at
the threshold by the exercise of powers under
13
Sections 482 CrPC or Article 226 of the Constitution
of India.
23. A specific allegation was made by the appellant-
complainant that deposits of her father’s and
mother’s bank accounts were usurped by the
accused by fraudulently posing as nominees. These
allegations, prima facie , constitute the offence of
fraud and criminal misappropriation. Hence, we are
of the firm opinion that the allegations as set out in
the FIR and the material collected by the
Investigating Officer is amply sufficient to proceed
against the accused, and it was not a case warranting
the exercise of inherent powers of the High Court to
quash the FIR.
24. As a consequence, we find it difficult to sustain
th
the impugned judgment and final order dated 8
January, 2024, which is accordingly set aside.
25. The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude
the investigation and file the result thereof (if already
not filed) before the Court concerned at the earliest.
In case the report under Section 173(2) CrPC
(corresponding to Section 193(3) of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023) has already been
14
filed, then the trial Court shall proceed with the
matter as per law.
26. However, we make it clear that the observations
made hereinabove are restricted only to the decision
of the present appeal(s) and shall have no bearing on
the rights and defences available to the parties at the
appropriate stage of the case.
27. The appeals are allowed in these terms.
28. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand
disposed of.
….……………………J.
(VIKRAM NATH)
...…………………….J.
(SANDEEP MEHTA)
NEW DELHI;
MARCH 17, 2026.
15
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S). OF 2026
(Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No(s). 3533 of 2024)
SHARLA BAZLIEL ….APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
BALDEV THAKUR
AND OTHERS ….RESPONDENT(S)
WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S). OF 2026
(Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No(s). 2498 of 2025)
J U D G M E N T
Mehta, J.
1. Heard.
2. Leave granted.
1
3. The appellant, Sharla Bazliel , being the original
complainant and the State of Himachal Pradesh are
before us for assailing the judgment and final order
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
NEETU KHAJURIA
Date: 2026.03.17
18:26:37 IST
Reason:
1
Hereinafter referred to as appellant-complainant.
1
th
dated 8 January, 2024 passed by the High Court of
2
Himachal Pradesh at Shimla in Cr. MMO No. 50 of
2023 whereby the learned Single Judge of the High
Court allowed the petition filed by the respondents-
accused under Section 482 of Code of Criminal
3
Procedure, 1973 and quashed the proceedings of FIR
th
No. 8/22 dated 26 August, 2022 lodged by the
appellant-complainant at Police Station State CID,
Shimla for the offences punishable under Sections
420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of the Indian
4
Penal Code, 1860 .
4. It was inter alia alleged in the FIR that the
respondents-accused herein, namely, Baldev
Thakur, Daljit Singh and Jienpuri Kamsuon, entered
into a criminal conspiracy to grab the property and
other articles of the appellant-complainant’s father,
Dr. G.B. Bazliel, by way of extortion, cheating, forging
documents, fabricating false evidence, fraud and
committing theft. The appellant-complainant alleged
in the FIR that she is the adopted daughter and legal
heir of Dr. G.R. Bazliel. Her family owned ancestral
2
Hereinafter referred to as ‘High Court’
3
For short ‘CrPC’.
4
For short ‘IPC’
2
property admeasuring 51.2 bighas in Village Katli,
Patwar Circle Dhagog, Mashobra, District Shimla,
H.P. The said agricultural land belonged to her
grandfather, Dr. I.R. Bazliel, and passed on to her
father after the death of her grandfather in the year
1986. She has been in possession of the property
since 1980. Her mother passed away in the year
2013, pursuant to which her father developed severe
depression associated with other health issues. The
appellant-complainant stated that she had been
taking care of her father until the year 2016.
5. Around that period, respondent No. 2-Daljit
Singh (who had a criminal background), introduced
her father to a woman named Jienpuri Kamsuon
(respondent No. 3). The appellant-complainant
strongly objected to her father’s relationship with
respondent No. 3 Jienpuri Kamsuon considering his
age and health condition. However, the respondents-
accused did not desist and, taking advantage of her
father’s weak mental and physical disposition,
influenced him to sever all ties with the family,
thereby rendering him completely isolated and
vulnerable. By practising such fraudulent
inducement, her father was persuaded to appoint
3
respondent No. 2-Daljit Singh as a nominee in his
bank accounts and, in this manner, the entire family
property was transferred to respondent No. 1- Baldev
Thakur.
6.
The appellant-complainant was residing at
Delhi in connection with her employment. Upon
coming to know about the illegal design of the
respondents-accused to grab the ancestral
properties, she called her father on phone and
objected to the transfers. She told her father that if
he was insisting upon the sale of the properties, at
least her own share and the share of her aunts
should first be set apart, and only thereafter should
the property be sold by following the due legal
th
process. She alleged that on 9 March, 2017, a sum
of Rs. 93 lakhs was transferred from her father’s UCO
Bank account to the bank account of respondent No.
2-Daljit Singh. The major part of this amount, i.e.,
nearly Rs. 65 lakhs, comprised the savings of the
appellant-complainant’s late mother (Dr. Yvonne
Bazliel), which had been credited to her father’s bank
st
account on 21 March, 2013 soon after her mother’s
death by encashing a fixed deposit. Another transfer
th
of Rs. 25 lakhs was made on 9 March, 2017, from
4
her father’s UCO Bank account to the account of
respondent No. 2-Daljit Singh. In this manner, a total
sum of Rs. 1.18 crores was transferred from her
father’s bank accounts to respondent No. 2-Daljit
Singh without being supported by any lawful
transaction or dealing between him and the
appellant-complainant’s father so as to justify such
huge money transfers.
7. It was further alleged that the respondents-
accused conspired together to manage the sale of the
family land admeasuring 49 bighas and 17 biswas in
favour of respondent No. 1-Baldev Thakur by way of
a registered Sale Deed No. 366/2017 for a purported
sale consideration of Rs. 3.90 crores. For effecting
this sale, the property was shown to be the self-
acquired property of her father, contrary to the
factual position as reflected in the revenue records.
The sale was made at a throwaway price, far below
the basic land rate, and by recording a totally false
recital that her father had obtained NOC from all
family members and legal heirs. It was specifically
alleged that NOC had never been given by any family
member consenting to the sale of the family land.
5
8. She came to know about the death of her father
through social media. It was alleged by the appellant-
complainant that her father died under mysterious
circumstances in Hotel Twin Towers at Kufri, Shimla
owned by respondent No. 1-Baldev Thakur. She tried
to contact respondent No. 3-Jienpuri Kamsuon to
find out the details but to no avail. After the death of
her father, respondent No. 1-Baldev Thakur took
possession of the family land and the house. She
could not even retrieve her personal belongings,
th
important documents and jewellery. On 4 March,
2022, respondent No. 2-Daljit Singh approached
UCO Bank claiming to be the nominee of her father
and closed his savings account and got transferred
an amount of Rs 5,74,526/- (Rupees five lakh
seventy-four thousand five hundred and twenty-six)
into his own account. She checked her father’s bank
accounts and was shocked to find that not a single
Rupee towards consideration for the two sale deeds
of 2017 and 2019 had been credited to any of the
bank accounts operated by her father. She suspected
that these transfers had been fraudulently staged by
the accused persons acting in conspiracy with the
intention to grab the entire property, both movable as
6
well as immovable, of her father and those owned by
the family. Respondent No. 2 – Daljit Singh
fraudulently managed to transfer the money
amounting to Rs.1,23,74,526/-, to which the
appellant-complainant’s family was entitled, into his
account at UCO Bank, Vidhan Sabha. Her father’s
two firearms also went missing after his death.
9. Based on the aforesaid allegations, FIR No. 8 of
th
2022 dated 26 August, 2022 came to be registered
at Police Station State CID, Shimla for offences
punishable under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471
and 120-B IPC and investigation was commenced.
10. The respondents-accused nominated in the FIR
filed the subject petition under Section 482 of CrPC
seeking quashing of the aforesaid FIR. In the course
of hearing of the quashing petition, the Investigating
rd
Officer filed a status report dated 3 July, 2023
specifically mentioning that there was a grave
discrepancy between the rates at which the lands
were purchased and the circle rates prevailing at the
relevant time. The rates portrayed in the sale deeds
were far lower than the prevailing circle rates for the
area in question. The said discrepancy was flagged to
highlight the element of fraud practiced by
7
respondent No. 1-Baldev Thakur and others in
preparing the sale documents, particularly, the
documents relating to circle rates of the land. The
Investigating Officer forwarded the questioned
5
documents to the State Forensic Science Laboratory ,
Junga, Himachal Pradesh for forensic document
th
examination on 27 February, 2023.
th
11. The SFSL reports dated 27 June, 2024 and
st
31 August, 2024 have been placed on record along
with the reply filed by the State in Criminal Appeal @
SLP(Crl.) No. 3533 of 2024, as per which the
documents nominating respondent No. 2-Daljit
Singh as the nominee of the appellant-complainant’s
father and the document relating to the closure of the
bank account of the appellant-complainant’s mother
were found to be bearing forged signatures. The
report specifically states that the admitted
specimen/signatures of the appellant-complainant’s
father do not match the questioned signatures. The
investigation further disclosed a marked discrepancy
between the land rates mentioned in the sale deeds
and the circle rates notified by the Government,
5
Hereinafter, referred to as the ‘SFSL’.
8
thereby establishing fraud in the circle-rate
documents used for registration of the sale deeds. It
was consequently found that respondent No. 1-
Baldev Thakur, by undervaluing the property on the
.
basis of false circle-rate documents, paid only Rs
32,04,000 towards stamp duty and registration
charges instead of the legally payable stamp duty @
Rs. 67,91,241, thereby causing a loss of Rs. 35,87,242
to the Government exchequer. In view of the SFSL
th st
reports dated 26 June, 2024 and 31 August, 2024
and the material collected during investigation in FIR
No. 8/2022, the investigating agency concluded that
respondent Nos. 1 to 3 (Baldev Thakur, Daljit Singh
and Jienpuri Kamsuon) had committed offences of
forgery and cheating by forging the signatures of the
appellant-complainant’s father and fraudulently
projecting themselves as his nominees. In this
manner, they misappropriated the monies from the
bank accounts of the appellant-complainant’s father.
As stated above, the criminal petitions filed by the
respondents-accused under Section 482 CrPC stand
th
allowed by the order dated 8 January,2024 passed
by the High court in Cr.MMO No. 50 of 2023 whereby
the FIR was quashed.
9
12. Being aggrieved, the appellant-complainant as
well as the State of Himachal Pradesh are before us
by way of these appeals with special leave.
13. We have heard and considered the submissions
advanced by learned counsel for the parties and have
carefully gone through the impugned order as well as
the reply filed by the State.
14. On a perusal of the impugned order, we find
that the High Court interfered in exercise of its
inherent powers and quashed the FIR at the very
threshold when investigation was in full swing and
vital material was yet to be collected.
15. The High Court recorded that the necessary
ingredients of fraud, misrepresentation or forgery
were not made out from the allegations set out in the
FIR. The High Court also held that the FIR had been
lodged on the basis of speculations and that such
allegations were not sufficient to constitute
cognizable offences. With these findings, the High
Court proceeded to quash the entire proceedings of
the FIR.
16. We may observe that where allegations of
forgery are set out in the FIR and Investigating
Agency has undertaken the exercise of getting the
10
disputed documents examined through the
handwriting expert, an order quashing the FIR
without awaiting the outcome of the handwriting
expert’s report would be totally unjustified.
17.
While deciding the quashing petitions, the
learned Single Judge took note of the fact that the
relevant documents had been taken into possession
and had been sent to the SFSL for analysis. However,
this vital aspect of the matter was completely glossed
over by the learned Single Judge while quashing the
FIR. Once the Court was apprised that investigation
into the genuineness of the signatures on the
disputed/questioned documents was being
undertaken and the signatures were in the process of
being analysed by the SFSL, there was no reason
whatsoever for the High Court to have proceeded to
quash the FIR by exercising jurisdiction under
Section 482 CrPC.
18. Resultantly, we are of the firm opinion that the
High Court prematurely quashed and terminated the
proceedings arising out of the FIR filed by the
appellant-complainant despite clear allegations
establishing the offences of fraud, falsification of
documents, forgery and criminal breach of trust. So
11
far as the observation made by the High Court that
the appellant had earlier filed FIR against her own
father is concerned, it may be noted that the said FIR
was in relation to an entirely different allegation,
namely that her father had attempted to usurp the
property of her grandfather by fabricating his
signatures.
19. The High Court relied on this Court’s decision
6
in Mir Nagvi Askari v. CBI, and observed that the
prosecution is required to prove that the accused had
forged the document by creating a false document.
20. We feel that the reliance placed by the High
Court on the aforesaid judgment to quash the FIR,
despite taking note of the fact that the Investigating
Agency had sought the report of the handwriting
expert, was wholly unjustified. The questioned
documents having already been forwarded for
examination, the proof of forgery would evidently
depend upon the outcome of the comparison to be
conducted by the handwriting expert. Thus, the
aspects relating to the creation of false documents
and the commission of forgery were still under
6
(2009) 15 SCC 643.
12
investigation when the High Court prematurely
proceeded to quash the FIR.
21. As a matter of fact, as per the specific averments
made in the Criminal Appeal @ SLP (Crl.) No. 2498 of
2025, filed on behalf of the State of Himachal
Pradesh, the SFSL report has been received which
concludes that the signatures on the questioned
documents are facsimile stamps i.e., not the
handwritten signatures of the father of respondent
No. 4 (appellant-complainant). Apparently, thus the
investigation has resulted into credible evidence
establishing that the documents on the strength
whereof the properties were transferred in favour of
the accused bore forged signatures of the appellant-
complainant’s father, namely, Dr. G.B. Bazliel.
22. We further find that the judgment in Mir Nagvi
Askari , relied upon by the High Court, was
(supra)
neither relevant nor applicable to the facts of the
present case. Since the report of the handwriting
expert had not yet been received, it was premature to
record any finding on falsification of documents and
forgery. In such circumstances, the prosecution of
the accused persons could not have been stifled at
the threshold by the exercise of powers under
13
Sections 482 CrPC or Article 226 of the Constitution
of India.
23. A specific allegation was made by the appellant-
complainant that deposits of her father’s and
mother’s bank accounts were usurped by the
accused by fraudulently posing as nominees. These
allegations, prima facie , constitute the offence of
fraud and criminal misappropriation. Hence, we are
of the firm opinion that the allegations as set out in
the FIR and the material collected by the
Investigating Officer is amply sufficient to proceed
against the accused, and it was not a case warranting
the exercise of inherent powers of the High Court to
quash the FIR.
24. As a consequence, we find it difficult to sustain
th
the impugned judgment and final order dated 8
January, 2024, which is accordingly set aside.
25. The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude
the investigation and file the result thereof (if already
not filed) before the Court concerned at the earliest.
In case the report under Section 173(2) CrPC
(corresponding to Section 193(3) of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023) has already been
14
filed, then the trial Court shall proceed with the
matter as per law.
26. However, we make it clear that the observations
made hereinabove are restricted only to the decision
of the present appeal(s) and shall have no bearing on
the rights and defences available to the parties at the
appropriate stage of the case.
27. The appeals are allowed in these terms.
28. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand
disposed of.
….……………………J.
(VIKRAM NATH)
...…………………….J.
(SANDEEP MEHTA)
NEW DELHI;
MARCH 17, 2026.
15