Interim Order 7

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: CT Cases. 9072/2024
Bhawna Shastri Vs. Kalpana Saxena and Ors.
(Gazipur)
01.09.2026
Matter is listed for orders on the application seeking registration of FIR
against the proposed accused.
Argued by: Sh. S.D. Kushwaha, Ld. Counsel for the complainant.
1. Vide this order, I shall dispose of the application under Section 175(3)
BNSS seeking directions for registration of FIR and investigation.
2. The allegations, in substance, arise out of a dispute between the parties
regarding distribution and alleged misappropriation of the assets of the deceased
mother of the complainant. It is not in dispute that the deceased had executed a
Will, whereby her movable and immovable properties were bequeathed in equal
shares in favour of the complainant and accused no.1, who is the real younger
sister of the complainant. It is also alleged that the Will also provided for
payment of Rs.10,000/- each to the children of the complainant, accused no.1
and the daughter of accused nos.2 and 3.
3. The ATR filed by the police has been perused. The IO has categorically
reported that the distribution of the assets is the bone of contention between
the parties and that no cognizable offence is disclosed. It is also borne out from
the ATR that a civil suit concerning the dispute is already pending between the
parties. The statements of the concerned persons as well as the copy of the Will
have also been placed on record.
4. The allegation that accused no.1 was in control of the monetary affairs of
the family, particularly on account of the alleged mental instability of the father
of the complainant, by itself does not disclose commission of any cognizable
offence. There is also no specific material placed before the Court
demonstrating any particular act of dishonest misappropriation, removal or
Page | 1
-- 1 of 2 --
conversion of the property by any of the proposed accused. The allegation
regarding opening of the locker and misappropriation is also not supported by
any material showing that accused no.1 had in fact opened the locker or
removed any property therefrom.
5. It is well settled that the mere existence of a civil dispute does not, by
itself, preclude criminal proceedings where the ingredients of a cognizable
offence are otherwise disclosed. The power under Section 175(3) BNSS is
discretionary and is ordinarily exercised where police investigation is necessary
for collection of evidence which cannot conveniently be produced by the
complainant, or where the nature of the allegations warrants
custodial/investigative steps. However, in the facts of the present case, the
material placed on record does not disclose such circumstances. The
controversy essentially concerns title, entitlement and distribution of the estate
of the deceased, which is already the subject matter of adjudication before the
competent civil forum. No purpose would be served by directing registration of
an FIR in the absence of material disclosing a cognizable offence.
6. Accordingly, the application under Section 175(3) BNSS is dismissed.
However, based upon the allegations in the complaint and the discussion
above, I take cognizance of the offense and the complainant is given an
opportunity for leading evidence in support of her allegations in terms of
Section-223 BNSS.
7. Re-list the matter on 18.01.2027 for recording of pre-summoning
evidence.
AMIT RANA
JMFC-06/(EAST)/KKD Courts, Delhi
01.09.2026
Page | 2
-- 2 of 2 --