Buyer Not Criminally Liable if Property Later Found Linked to Forged Will: Supreme Court

Ritwik Choudhury (Bar and Bench) 28 April 2026

Consumer Interest

The Supreme Court recently held that a person who purchases property cannot be prosecuted for cheating or forgery merely because the property is later found to be linked to a disputed or allegedly forged Will (S Anand vs. State of Tamil Nadu & Anr.).

A Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta quashed criminal proceedings against a buyer who was named an accused in a long-running property dispute. The Court found that there was no material showing his involvement in the alleged fabrication of a Will tied to the property.

The case arose from allegations that a Will dated September 12, 1988, had been forged to transfer land belonging to a deceased owner. Based on the disputed Will, the property was later sold to multiple purchasers through registered sale deeds executed in 1998.

One of the purchasers was arrayed as an accused and charged with offences including cheating, forgery and criminal conspiracy. He approached the Madras High Court seeking the quashing of the case, contending that he had purchased the property for valid consideration after verifying the seller’s title and had no role in creating the allegedly forged Will.

The High Court refused to quash the proceedings, stating that the issues raised involved disputed questions of fact requiring a trial.

Setting aside this decision, the Supreme Court noted that there was not even an iota of evidence to show that the appellant (buyer) had participated in preparing the alleged forged Will or had knowledge that it was fabricated.

The Court further observed that even if the Will were ultimately found to be forged, the purchasers themselves would be affected, as their ownership rights would become uncertain.

Relying on its earlier ruling in Mohammed Ibrahim v. State of Bihar, the Court reiterated that criminal liability for cheating requires proof that the accused deceived the complainant or knowingly participated in the fraudulent act.

In the absence of such material, the Court held that allowing the criminal case to proceed against the purchaser would amount to an abuse of the process of law.

Accordingly, the Court set aside the High Court’s order and quashed the criminal proceedings against the appellant.

Courtesy: Bar & Bench

Comments

User

Consumer Interest

‘Triple Hit’ for Solar Consumers as Maharashtra Mulls Duty, Grid Charges, Tariff Changes

Moneylife Digital Team 24 April 2026

The Maharashtra government’s move to examine imposing an electricity duty on rooftop solar and self-generated power has raised concerns among consumers and industry stakeholders, with experts warning that the proposal could...

Consumer Interest

Fraud Alert: One APK, Total Takeover — The Rising Threat of 'Android God Mode' Malware

Yogesh Sapkale, 24 April 2026

It started with what seemed like a routine message. Ramesh Kulkarni, a small-business owner in Pune, received a WhatsApp message from what appeared to be his bank's customer support team. His account would be blocked, the message...

Consumer Interest

Govt Rejects Speculation of ₹25 Fuel Price Increase

Moneylife Digital Team 23 April 2026

The Union ministry of petroleum and natural gas (MoPNG) on Thursday firmly denied reports claiming petrol and diesel prices in India could soon rise by ₹25-₹28/litre, stating that no such proposal is under consideration by the...

Consumer Interest

Housing Society Problems and Solutions: Understanding Rights, Records and Responsibilities

Shirish Shanbhag 23 April 2026

Cooperative housing society (CHS/the Society) members often face practical challenges that lie at the intersection of legal procedures and everyday governance. Whether it is updating ownership records after a registered transaction,...