HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 8906 of 2025 Court No. - 11 HON'BLE ABDUL MOIN, J. HON'BLE MRS. BABITA RANI, J. 1. Supplementary affidavits filed by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as by Shri Praveen Kumar Pandey, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.4 are taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. for the respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Shri Praveen Kumar Pandey, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.4. 3. With the consent of learned counsels appearing for the contesting parties, the writ petition is being disposed of finally. 4. Under challenge is the F.I.R. dated 06.09.2025 bearing Case Crime No.0061 of 2025, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station Inhauna, District Amethi, a copy of which is Annexure-1 to the petition. 5. The argument of learned counsel for the petitioner is that a perusal of the F.I.R. indicates that the petitioner is alleged to have forged and fabricated a death certificate of one Shri Santosh Kumar dated 16.02.2018. 6. The contention is that a perusal of the F.I.R. itself indicates that an attempt was made by the complainant to lodge an F.I.R. on 10.03.2024 but he did not succeed and thereafter, after having sent the information in this regard on 25.03.2025 through a registered post, he filed an application under 156(3) Cr.P.C. on the basis of which the aforesaid F.I.R. has been lodged on Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Pankaj Shukla, Abhishek Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Praveen Kumar Pandey, Sachin Verma Mohd . Shafiq .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) 06.09.2025. 7. The further contention is that a Civil Suit No.791 of 2011 is pending between the parties and that the petitioner had filed various documents along with an application dated 13.07.2018 in the aforesaid civil suit in which the copy of the death certificate of Shri Santosh Kumar was also annexed. The copy of the said application is Annexure- S.A.1 to the supplementary affidavit filed today. 8. The contention is that once the aforesaid list of documents had been filed before the learned court in the year 2018, consequently, the lodging of the F.I.R., on the basis of the aforesaid averments, as indicated above and as also find reproduced in the F.I.R., is only an attempt to turn a civil dispute into a criminal case which amounts to abuse of the process of Court. 9. On the other hand, Shri Praveen Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the respondent No.4 states that he had no information about the said list of documents having been filed and it is only when the civil suit came for final hearing in the year 2024 that he came to know about the said fabricated death certificate. However, he does not dispute about the said documents being filed in the year 2018. 10. The aforesaid argument of Shri Pandey is found to be patently fallacious considering the fact that the list of documents had been filed way back in the year 2018 and once the respondent No.4 is bonafidely pursuing the civil suit, there cannot be any occasion of he only having come to know about the filing of the said documents after a period of six years. 11. Considering the aforesaid, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction that no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioners till filing of the final report in the aforesaid case. October 28, 2025 S. Shivhare CRLP No. 8906 of 2025 2 (Mrs. Babita Rani,J.) (Abdul Moin,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHASHANK SHIVHARE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench