The Supreme Court has ruled to dismiss criminal charges against a buyer involved in a long-standing forged Will and property fraud case in Tamil Nadu. The court emphasized that merely purchasing a disputed property for value, without concrete evidence linking to forgery or conspiracy, does not warrant criminal prosecution. Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta overturned a Madras High Court decision that had declined to halt proceedings against the appellant, S. Anand, related to a 2004 FIR alleging a fabricated Will and fraudulent sale of ancestral property in Karur district.
In its judgment, the apex court highlighted the absence of any proof suggesting the appellant’s involvement in the creation of the disputed Will dated September 12, 1988, or awareness of the alleged forgery during the purchase. The court stated that as a buyer of the property for value, the appellant cannot be seen as the one who provided fraudulent inducement in this scenario. The case stemmed from accusations that the complainant’s deceased brother, along with others, forged their father’s Will to carry out property sales, including to the appellant, thus depriving rightful heirs of their property rights.
Examining the available evidence, the Supreme Court noted that the appellant had no links to the purported creation of the forged Will or the earlier transactions forming the basis of the prosecution’s conspiracy claim. The court reiterated established principles governing criminal liability in property disputes, emphasizing that criminal charges for cheating typically require clear proof of fraudulent intent or active conspiracy. The court also pointed out that in cases of fraudulent misrepresentation, the aggrieved party is usually the buyer when property is sold by someone claiming ownership, unless direct deception is proven.
The Supreme Court concluded that continuing criminal proceedings against the appellant would constitute an abuse of the legal process. It deemed further prosecution unjustified and a gross misuse of the court’s procedures. Consequently, all proceedings against the appellant in the ongoing criminal case were quashed, while the trial would proceed against the other accused individuals.
