Proceedings alleging forged land records were quashed for want of prima facie material.

The petitioners sought to quash proceedings in C.C. No. 4951/2023 arising from a complaint alleging that they had tampered with or created revenue and grant documents dating from 1994–95 and used them as genuine.

The police filed a charge sheet for offences under Sections 408, 409, 465, 468, 471 and 420 read with Section 149 of the IPC, while seeking permission to file a further charge sheet after obtaining records from the Taluk office.

The petitioners claimed to be original grantees and argued that the complaint was made decades after the alleged events, without an enquiry or material showing fabrication.

The State confirmed that the documents had not been secured and sent for forensic examination, no further charge sheet had been filed, and no departmental enquiry had been conducted.

1. Whether the criminal proceedings could continue when the prosecution had produced no prima facie material establishing that the petitioners fabricated or used forged documents.

2. Whether the proceedings warranted quashing under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. in light of the alleged investigative deficiencies, absence of the contemplated enquiry, and the filing of the charge sheet against deceased persons.

The Court considered its inherent power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to quash proceedings where continuation would amount to an abuse of process or cause a miscarriage of justice.

It also considered the offences alleged under Sections 408, 409, 420, 465, 468 and 471 read with Section 149 of the IPC, and the prosecution’s invocation of Section 192-A of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act.

The Court noted that an enquiry was contemplated before proceeding under Section 192-A, and found that none had been conducted in this case.

The petitioners produced original grant documents, which had been kept in the Court’s safe custody.

The Court found that the prosecution had neither secured the relevant records nor obtained a forensic report supporting the allegation of fabrication; the State also confirmed that no departmental enquiry had taken place.

The Court further noted that the charge sheet had been filed against deceased persons and considered this indicative of an inadequate investigation.

In the absence of material establishing a prima facie case, and given the failure to conduct the contemplated enquiry, the Court held that continuing the prosecution would amount to an abuse of process and a miscarriage of justice.

It also directed the Registrar (Judicial) to return the original documents to the petitioners’ counsel.