In a significant development, the appellate court has ruled in favor of the Respondent in the Forgery Allegation Case against the Appellant. The case revolved around a disputed shop tenancy agreement dated 30.03.1988, with the Appellant claiming the Respondent’s tenancy was based on a false agreement. However, the civil court’s finding of a forged signature on the agreement led to the dismissal of the criminal complaint. Learn more about this ruling and its implications in our detailed summary.
Analysis
- Original Suit filed by the respondent claiming to be a tenant in disputed shop
- Appellant relied on an agreement dated 30.03.1988 to prove respondent was not a tenant
- Complaint filed alleging the agreement was false and fabricated
- Civil court found respondent’s signature on agreement was forged
- Appellate court in Civil Appeal No 17/2015 allowed, stating agreement was not forged
- Conclusion: Criminal complaint loses basis after appellate court’s decision
Also Read: Expanding the Notional Extension Theory: A Legal Analysis
Decision
- The appellants were aggrieved by the order dated 21.05.2019
- The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash the proceedings was dismissed
- The entire proceedings in Complaint Case No.2705/2003 were sought to be quashed
- The appeal was allowed and the proceedings in Complaint Case No. 2705/2003 were quashed
Also Read: Analysis of Intent in Fatal Assault Case
Case Title: MUKUL AGRAWAL Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH (2020 INSC 161)
Case Number: Crl.A. No.-000249-000249 / 2020
