RATTAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners are facing trial under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 470 and 471, Indian Penal Code, in the Court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patiala, on the allegation of forging a Will alleged to have been executed by one Karam Singh. This prosecution was commenced in pursuance of First Information Report dated July 6, 1982. It is alleged by the petitioners that the complainant in the criminal case filed a civil suit against them in the Court of Senior Sub Judge, Patiala on July 15, 1982, for declaration wherein the validity of the aforesaid Will has been challenged They have, therefore, filed this petition under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, praying that the proceedings in the criminal case may be ordered to be stayed till the decision of the civil suit.

(2.) IT is not disputed that parallel proceedings in the civil as well as in the criminal Court regarding the Will alleged to have been forged are maintainable. As held by a Single Bench of this Court in Gurdev Singh and others v. The State of Punjab, 1978 P.L.J. (Cr.) 45, the trial of a criminal case is liable to be stayed during the pendency of the civil suit only if the continuance of the criminal proceedings are likely to cause embarrassment. In the present case no such embarrassment will be caused if the trial in the criminal Court is allowed to continue. In the criminal proceedings the vital point for determination is whether the petitioners have forged the said Will. In the civil suit filed by the complainant the question of forging of the Will is secondary. The suit for declaration of title over the land which is also the subject matter of the Will has been filed on the ground of ownership and in the written statement the present petitioners have resisted the suit mainly on the ground that they have become owners of the land by adverse possession. The existence of the Will in their favour has been taken only as an alternative ground. There is nothing to prevent them to press only the ground of adverse possession and not to place any particular reliance on the disputed Will. It is, therefore, clear that the decision of the civil suit does not hinge entirely on the validity of the Will. Thus, there can be no manner of doubt that a decision given by a criminal court with regard to the Will is not likely to cause embarrassment in the decision of the civil suit.

(3.) IN this view of the matter the present petition is dismissed.