Learned Advocate appearing for the Petitioner, State and the private
Respondent Nos. 5 & 6 is present.
As per submission by the learned advocates it is understood that the
petitioner and the private respondents are already contesting for establishing
their right before the civil court. The foundation of the case is based on a
power of attorney. The power of attorney is disputed by the petitioner.
It is reflected from the records that initially the petitioner was successful
before the Trial Court. Against the said order, the respondents preferred an
appeal wherein the respondents were successful in the appeal.
The Petitioner thereafter preferred a second appeal, which is still pending.
In view of the Civil Court already in seisin of the matter, the police
authorities have hardly any scope to interfere until and unless a specific
direction is passed by the Civil Court. So far as the issue relating to power of
attorney is concerned, if there is any allegation regarding the veracity of the
document or the document being manufactured, it would be the petitioner who
would approach the jurisdictional court in respect of the document which the
petitioner claims to be manufactured so that appropriate directions upon the
police authorities can be passed by the concerned Court.
Petitioner would also be at liberty to invoke the jurisdiction of the criminal
court by adhering to the ratios decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. It has
been held in Iqbal Singh Marwah & Anr. Vs. Meenakshi Marwah & Anr reported
in (2005) 4 SCC 370, in respect of forged documents being produced before
Court to obtain an order, appropriate provisions of CrPC are to be invoked.
Paragraphs 10 and 11 are relevant which held as follows: