Featured image for Supreme Court Judgment dated 03-11-2017 in case of petitioner name Senior Manager (P&D), RIICO Lt vs The State of Rajasthan & Anr.
| |

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of Forgery Case Against Private Party in Rajasthan

Updated on

The case of Senior Manager (P&D), RIICO Ltd. vs. The State of Rajasthan & Anr. revolves around the dismissal of a criminal complaint alleging forgery and fraud in a commercial dispute. The Supreme Court upheld the decision of the Rajasthan High Court, which dismissed the criminal case against the accused party on the grounds that there was insufficient evidence to establish forgery beyond reasonable doubt.

Background of the Case

The dispute originated in 1992 when the appellant, a Senior Manager at Rajasthan State Industrial Development and Investment Corporation (RIICO), lodged a complaint against M/s. Kanha Refined Oil and Vanaspati Pvt. Ltd., represented by Ravi Setia (Respondent No. 2). The complaint alleged that a forged letter dated April 10, 1992, was produced in a civil suit to influence legal proceedings.

The key allegations included:

  • The letter in question was forged and falsely signed on behalf of RIICO.
  • The letter was allegedly used to gain an advantage in an ongoing civil dispute.
  • The accused had dispatched the letter through a Class IV employee of RIICO to make it appear genuine.
  • The police investigation found discrepancies in the signature, leading to allegations of forgery under Sections 467, 468, and 471 IPC.

Lower Court Proceedings

Magistrate’s Decision

The Chief Judicial Magistrate initially accepted the police’s Final Report, stating that since the letter had been filed in a civil suit, the case fell under Section 195(1)(b)(ii) Cr.P.C., which bars prosecution without the court’s permission.

Sessions Court’s Decision

The Additional Sessions Judge set aside the Magistrate’s order and remanded the case for reconsideration, ruling that Section 195(1)(b)(ii) Cr.P.C. did not apply as the document was allegedly forged before being filed in court.

Revised Magistrate’s Decision

Upon reconsideration, the Chief Judicial Magistrate again dismissed the complaint, this time ruling that there was insufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case of forgery.

High Court’s Decision

The Rajasthan High Court upheld the dismissal, stating that:

  • The evidence did not conclusively establish that Respondent No. 2 had forged the letter.
  • There was no direct proof linking the accused to the alleged forgery.
  • The decision of the Magistrate and Sessions Court was legally sound and did not warrant interference.

Arguments Before the Supreme Court

Petitioner’s Arguments

The appellant contended that:

  • The High Court erred in dismissing the case despite the police report suggesting forgery.
  • The letter was proven to be forged and was used to gain an undue advantage in legal proceedings.
  • The benefit of doubt given to the accused was unjustified, considering the evidence on record.

Respondent’s Arguments

The respondent countered:

  • The police report was inconclusive and did not directly implicate the accused.
  • The letter was dispatched by a RIICO employee, and there was no evidence linking Respondent No. 2 to the forgery.
  • The Magistrate and High Court had correctly assessed the evidence and found no basis for prosecution.

Supreme Court’s Observations

Justices A.K. Sikri and Ashok Bhushan upheld the High Court’s decision, reiterating that:

  • For an offense of forgery, there must be clear evidence linking the accused to the act.
  • The prosecution failed to establish beyond doubt that the accused had prepared the forged document.
  • The previous decisions dismissing the complaint were legally sound and did not require interference.

The Court noted:

“The evidence on record does not establish a prima facie case of forgery or fraud against the accused. The High Court’s order does not suffer from any legal infirmity.”

Final Judgment

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the dismissal of the criminal complaint. The ruling emphasized that mere suspicion cannot replace conclusive evidence in cases of forgery and fraud.

Implications of the Judgment

The ruling reinforces key legal principles:

  • Forgery cases must be backed by clear and conclusive evidence.
  • Courts must exercise caution before taking cognizance of fraud allegations without strong proof.
  • Criminal proceedings should not be used to settle civil disputes.

This judgment sets an important precedent in cases involving allegations of document forgery in civil disputes.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: Senior Manager (P&D) vs The State of Rajasth Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 03-11-2017.pdf

Direct Downlaod Judgment: Direct downlaod this Judgment

See all petitions in Fraud and Forgery
See all petitions in Bail and Anticipatory Bail
See all petitions in Judgment by A.K. Sikri
See all petitions in Judgment by Ashok Bhushan
See all petitions in dismissed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments November 2017
See all petitions in 2017 judgments

See all posts in Criminal Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category

Similar Posts