The Madhya Pradesh High Court at Indore has dismissed a petition seeking quashing of an FIR registered over an alleged forged will in a family property dispute. The FIR was registered at Dharampuri Police Station under Sections 61(2), 336(3), 338 and 340(2) of the BNS, 2023.
Justice Gajendra Singh held that since the alleged forgery was committed outside the court, there was no requirement to initiate proceedings under Section 379 of the BNSS before police registration of the case. The Court accordingly refused to quash the FIR and dismissed the petition.
Background
The dispute arose between members of the same family over agriculture land situated at Village Lunhera Khurd and Village Pipalnakgarhi, Tehsil Dharampuri, District Dhar. Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 and Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 were real brothers and sisters. Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 had filed a civil suit seeking a declaration of title over the disputed agricultural land before the 2nd Civil Judge, Senior Division, Dharampuri. The suit was registered as RCS No. A-34/2022.
During the civil proceedings, the petitioners relied on a will, marked as Ex.D/154, which they claimed had been executed by their father, Shersingh, in favour of petitioner No. 2, Narendra Singh. Petitioner Nos. 3 and 4, Shivraj Singh and Dharmendra Singh, were stated to be attesting witnesses to the document.
In its judgment dated July 28, 2026, the civil court recorded a finding that the will was forged and directed the registration of an FIR against the petitioners. It further directed that any other person found to be involved could also be made an accused. Following that direction, Dharampuri Police Station registered Crime No. 242/2026 under Sections 61(2), 336(3), 338 and 340(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
The petitioners then approached the Madhya Pradesh High Court under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking quashing of the FIR. They argued that the criminal prosecution could not be founded solely on the findings recorded in the civil proceedings and also challenged the procedure followed by the civil court in directing registration of the FIR.
The petitioners argued that the alleged forgery concerned a document produced before the civil court and, therefore, the procedure under Section 379 of the BNSS should have been followed instead of directly directing registration of an FIR.
The High Court examined the Supreme Court's ruling in Sachida Nand Singh v. State of Bihar and considered whether the alleged forgery was committed in relation to a document while it was before the court or had occurred outside the court before the document was produced.
The Court observed, "In this case, the forgery was committed outside of the Court." It consequently held that a preliminary inquiry under Section 379 of the BNSS was not required in these circumstances and that there was no legal impediment to police registration of the case.
The Court further held that a civil court is not prohibited from directing a party or witness to forward a complaint to the police when serious allegations of forgery arise. It referred to the inherent powers of civil courts under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Justice Gajendra Singh held that there was no scope for quashing the FIR and dismissed the petition.
Case Title: Himmat Singh and Others v. The State of Madhya Pradesh and Others
Case Number: M.Cr.C. No. 39618 of 2026
Judge: Hon'ble Shri Justice Gajendra Singh
Decision Date: September 11, 2026
