2025:UHC:2295 HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc. Application U/s 482 No. 1117 of 2017 26th March, 2025 Ram Krishna Chela Keshawanand Ji --Applicant Versus State Of Uttarakhand and others --Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Narendra Bali, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. Deepak Bisht, learned Deputy Advocate General, Mr. Devendra Singh, A.G.A. and Mr. Prabhat Kandpal, Brief Holder, for the State/respondent no.1. Mr. Ravi Bisht, Advocate for the respondent no.2. Mr. Ravi Babulkar, Advocate, for the respondent no.3. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J. By means of present C-482 Petition, the applicant seeks to quash charge-sheet dated 11.11.2007 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1482 of 2016 (Old No. 1262 of 2008), for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC. 2. The complainant/respondent no. 3 herein filed a complaint on 13.08.2007, under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun, wherein he had alleged that respondent no.3 is the Secretary of Bal Brahmachari Mission Nirdhan Niketan Ashram, Khadkhadi, Haridwar, which is a registered Society, under the Societies Registration Act. Petitioner-Shri Ram Krishna Chela 1 2025:UHC:2295 Keshwanand Ji has forged the letter of the registered society, namely, Bal Bramhchari Mission, Nirdhan Niketan Ashram, Khadkhadi, Haridwar, and is misusing the said letter for utilizing it for his personal interest. After the investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the applicant on 11.11.2007. The applicant has challenged this charge-sheet by means of present C-482 Petition. 3. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that actually, two Civil Suits were filed, one by the applicant and the another one by the complainant-Sardar Gurcaharan Singh. Both the Civil Suits, (Civil Suit No. 70 of 2008 and Civil Suit No. 78 of 2008), were consolidated and were decided by a common judgement and order dated 04.10.2016, whereby the suit filed by the complainant was dismissed while the suit of the applicant herein was decreed. Against the order of dismissal of the suit of the complainant, two appeals were filed by the complainant, which too were dismissed by the Appellate court on 20.09.2022 and against this order of dismissal, no Second Appeal has been filed by the complainant as such the judgment & order dated 04.10.2016 has attained finality. 4. It is the contention of learned counsel of the applicant that the subject matter of the Civil Suits as well as the complaint, are the same one, and these have been decided by the competent Civil Court, which has been affirmed by the Appellate Court. Therefore, the present C-482 Petition deserves to be allowed. 5. Per Contra, learned counsel for the complainant/respondent no. 2 submits that complaint was filed challenging the allegation of forged Will in the year 2007, whereas the Civil Suit was filed in the year 2008. 6. Be that as it may, the matter whether the Will was forged or genuine, an issue in this regard was framed by the Trial Court in 2 2025:UHC:2295 Civil Suit No. 70 of 2008, after considering the evidence on record, the Trial Court has come to the conclusion that the Will was genuine. The same conclusion was upheld in the Appeal also. Since the issue regarding the genuineness of the Will has been decided by the Competent Civil Court after taking into consideration the evidence led by the parties, therefore, issue regarding genuineness of the Will is no more res integra. As such, the judgment and order dated 04.10.2016 passed in Civil Suit No. 70 of 2008 and the Civil Suit No. 78 of 2008 have attained finality. 7. Therefore, present C-482 Petition is allowed. 8. Accordingly, the charge-sheet no. 482 of 2007, dated 11.11.2007, issued against the applicant, under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1482 of 2016 (Old No. 1262 of 2008), pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar, is hereby quashed. (Alok Mahra, J.) 26.03.2025 Kaushal 3