Pankaj Kumar Verma v. State Of NCT Of Delhi & ANR
$--2,3 & *
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ BAIL APPLN. 223/2016 RAJINDER GHOGRA ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Dhan Mohan, Advocate versus THE STATE GOVT OF NOT OF DELHI Respondent Through Ms. Neelam Sharma, APP for the State Mr. K B Upadhyay, Advocate for the Complainant.
+ BAIL APPLN. 768/2016 i PANKAJ KUMAR VERMA Petitioner Through Mr. M S Ahluwalia, Advocate versus STATE OF NOT OF DELHI & ANR Respondents Through Ms. Neelam Sharma, APP for the State Mr. K B Upadhyay, Advocate for the Complainant + BAIL APPLN. 1226/2016 MUKESH SOOD Petitioner Through Mr. M S Ahluwalia, Advocate versus STATE OF NOT OF DELHI & ANR •••• Respondents Through Ms. Neelam Sharma, APP for the State Mr. K B Upadhyay, Advocate for the Complainant
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK
ORDER
o/o 26.07.2016 Complainants are the mother, wife, daughter of Late Faiz Murtaza Ali. One Rohini Wahi @ Ruhani Ali claimed herself to be the second wife By:AMULYA
of Late Faiz Murtaza AH and has propounded a Will dated 14.04.2013 of Late Faiz Murtaza Ali.
It has been admitted during the course of hearing by the counsel for the complainant as well as learned APP that various civil litigations are pending between the complainants and Ruhani Ali in Palampur Court and Saket Courts, Delhi.
The complainants have also filed a suit for declaration under Saket . f Court, Delhi, praying therein that the said Will be declared null and void being a forged document. It has also been admitted that none of the petitioners are beneficiaries in the Will.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner Rajinder Ghogra was the Advocate of Late Faiz Murtaza Ali, who had executed Vakalatnama in favour of Rajinder Ghogra in some of the litigations. Rajinder Ghogra was not a stranger to Late Faiz Murtaza Ali, as has been projected in the investigation.
It is further submitted that Rajinder Ghogra had drafted the Will on the instructions of Late Faiz Murtaza Ali, during his lifetime. Petitioners Mukesh Sood and Pankaj Kumar Verma are merely witnesses and they do not derive any benefit under the Will in respect of any of the movable or immovable properties of Late Faiz Murtaza Ali. It is further submitted that on 14.04.2013, when the Will was executed. Late Faiz Murtaza Ali was alive. He died on 20.06.2013. After his death, disputes have arisen between his wives and children with which petitioners have nothing to do. He further submits that similar complaint was filed by Sehar Ali in District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh, wherein it was specifically alleged that the Will in question was a forged and fabricated
document.
Learned APP for the State submits that signatures of Late Faiz Murtaza Ali on the Will have been compared with his other signatures and as per FSL signature on the Will does not match with the signature as appearing in other pages. The matter was inquired by the SSP of District Kangra, H.P., but no action was taken. On the basis of a similar complaint, action has been taken by the Delhi Police under the influence of complainants, even though it has no jurisdiction. Keeping in view the above facts, it is ordered that in case of arrest, the petitioners be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of ?25,000/- each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer/SHO concerned. The applications are disposed of.
a.i^^aTMak, j JULY 26,2016 P