SIRI NIWAS Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CASE FIR No. 181 dated 12.6.2001 registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 506 IPC at PS Jagadhari has given rise to Crl. Misc. applications named Crl. Misc. No. 25806-M of 2001 titled Siri Niwas v. State of Haryana, and Crl. Misc. No. 27153-M of 2001 titled Ravi Kumar and Sant Kumar v. State of Haryana.

(2.) SMT . Chandra Wati had 3/8 share in land measuring 29 kanal 1 marla situated in village Bilaspur bye-pass Road, Jagadhari. She died on 17.7.91. As per Lakhmi Chand, who is lodger of this FIR, his wife Smt. Chandra Wati had executed a will dated 11.5.91 in his favour. As per Lakhmi Chand, Smt. Chandra Wati did not execute any other will. It was her last will and testament. As per him, she never executed any will dated 31.5.91 in favour of Siri Niwas. Will dated 31.5.91 being set up by Siri Niwas is false, forged and fabricated.

(3.) IT was submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that Smt. Chandra Wati executed will dated 31.5.91 in favour of Siri Niwas which was a genuine will. It was submitted that Shri Ajay Mohan Paliwal, Finger Print Expert compared the purported signatures of Smt. Chandra Wati appearing on will dated 31.5.91 with those appearing on will dated 11.5.91 and her admitted signatures appearing on the plaint and wakalatnama of civil suit Smt. Chandra Wati v. Siri Niwas filed in the court of Shri C.B. Jaglian, Additional Senior Sub Judge, Jagadhari and found that the purported signatures of Smt. Chandra Wati appearing on will dated 31.5.91 tallied with her admitted signatures on the plaint and wakalatnama of civil suit Smt. Chandra Wati v. Siri Niwas filed in the court of Shri C.B. Jaglian, Additional Senior Sub Judge, Jagadhari. He found that the admitted signatures of Smt. Chandra Wati appearing on the plaint and wakalatnama of civil suit Smt. Chandra Wati v. Siri Niwas filed in the court of Shri C.B. Jaglian, Additional Senior Sub Judge, Jagadhari did not tally with her purported signatures on will dated 11.5.91. It was submitted that there are two reports of different finger print experts; one supporting Siri Niwas and the other supporting Lakhmi Chand. It was submitted that the science of hand writing is a not an exact science and therefore, there can be no tilt in favour of Lakhmi Chand so as to deny anticipatory bail to Siri Niwas. It was submitted that the opinion of Shri N.K. Jain, Finger Print Expert, Ambala could not form the basis of declining anticipatory bail to the petitioners.