SHIVA NATH PRASAD versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

Citation: [2006] 2 S.C.R. 98 · Decided: 03-02-2006 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: B.P. SINGH · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
SHIV A NA TH PRASAD 
' , 
v. 
ST A TE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. 
FEBRUARY 3, 2006 
B 
[B.P. SINGH AND S.H. KAPADIA, JJ.] 
.> 
P-enal Code, I 860-Sections I 208, 406, 420, 467, 4 I 7 and 204 /PC-
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973-Section 482-Evidence Act, 1872-Sections 
c 
.91 and 92-Criminal complaint filed before trial court against accused for 
conspiracy, criminal breach of trust and misappropriation of assets vested in 
trusts for purpose of public charitable institutions on the basis of a will 
purported to be executed by testator-Trial Court took cognizance of the 
offences and issued summons to the accused-High Court declined to intervene 
under section 482 Cr.P.C.-Accused contending before the Court that the 
D complaint is malafide, vexatious and oppressive and is an abuse of the process 
of law and that the issue raised is purely of a civil nature which cannot be 
tried in a criminal court-Correctness of-Held, the complaint is based on 
1 
mutual and oral agreements imposing secret trust obligations as evidenced by 
the trust deeds- "Secret trust" is a doctrine evolved to prevent fraud-Oral 
E 
evidence is admissible to prove fraud-Hence, the complaint cannot be 
dismissed at the initial stage on the ground of alleged malafides of the 
complainant. 
-
MPB and his wife PDB formed five trusts covering their assets estimated 
at around Rs. 2400 crores. After MPB died, PDB settled the assets of the five 
F trusts for the benefit of three public charitable institutions. Thereafter, PDB 
purported to have executed a will bequeathing all her properties to one RSL 
>-· 
after dissolving all the five trusts. After the death of PDB, RSL claimed the 
properties under the will. 
Complainant-respondent filed a complaint praying for issuance of 
G process against RSL and three others (including the two appellants) before 
trial court for criminal conspiracy, criminal breach of trust, cheating, forgery 
and other offences under section 1208 read with sections 406, 420, 467, 417 
.. 
and 204 IPC. The complainant has alleged in his complaint that MPB and 
PDB desired to leave their estate, after their demise to charity and for that 
H 
98 
I 
SHIV A NA TH PRASAD v. ST A TE OF WEST BENGAL 
99 
,._ 
·}.>-
purpose, they treated five mutual and reciprocal irrevocable trusts for vesting A 
the assets in three public charitable institutions; that he was a privy to the 
discussions/consultations and thinking at the time of creation of the trusts and 
public charitable institutions for the purpose envisaged; that after their 
demise, the assets of the trusts stood finally settled in the public charitable 
institutions as remainder beneficiaries; that when RSL made a claim to the B 
entire estate under a purported will executed by PDB, on making enquiries, 
) 
it revealed that RSL had criminally conspired with the other accused in 
~ 
misappropriating the assets by creating false evidence to show that the five 
trusts stood revoked and dissolved during the lifetime of PDB and a will was 
,,, 
executed bequeathing all the assets in his favour; that the object of the alleged 
will was to destroy the interest of the three public charitable institutions; that c 
one of the trustees of all the trusts was not even aware of the alleged 
I.. 
revocation/dissolution of the trusts by PDB and hence there was no revocation 
of the five trusts as alleged by the accused; that the accused committed 
criminal breach of trust by doing such acts; that RSL committed fraud and 
criminal breach of trust by getting a will signed by PDB without disclosing D 
the nature of the document; and that RSL brought into existence a letter 
~ 
termed as codicil allegedly signed by PDB four years after the execution of 
,-. 
the will in conspiracy with the other accused to fortify the will. 
The trial court, on the basis of the complaint, found a prima facie case 
for offences under sections 120B, 406, 417 and 420 IPC against the accused E 
and summoned the accused including the appellants. The appellants moved 
High Court under section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of the criminal 
proceedings. The High Court refused to intervene and set aside or quash the 
proceedings. 
In appeal to the Court, the appellants contended that the criminal F 
-·~ 
complaint was filed by the complainant at the instance of au Interested group; 
that it is harrasive, ma/afide and is .used as a tool of oppression to terrorise 
the appellants into succumbing to the pressure; that the complaint is 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.