High Courts Cannot Routinely Stay Filing of Charge Sheets During Investigation, Especially in Large-Scale Land Fraud and Forgery Cases

Held: The Supreme Court held that while High Courts may, in appropriate cases, protect accused persons from coercive action during pendency of proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution, they should not ordinarily restrain investigating agencies from filing a police report or charge sheet under Section 193(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The Court clarified that the judgment in Pradnya Pranjal Kulkarni v. State of Maharashtra did not justify blanket directions staying submission of the charge sheet during investigation. The Court further held that where allegations disclose repeated fraudulent alienation of society land through forged documents and multiple FIRs across States, courts must be slow to interfere at the investigation stage merely on the ground that parallel civil disputes are pending.

Summary: The dispute arose from allegations that lands belonging to the Spiritual Regeneration Movement Foundation of India, a society established under the guidance of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, were repeatedly sold by unauthorized groups using forged documents, fake office-bearer records and fraudulent powers of attorney. Several FIRs had already been registered in different States, including Uttar Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and Madhya Pradesh, alleging offences of cheating, forgery, criminal conspiracy and fraudulent sale of society properties. Respondent No. 2, a director of M/s Singhvahini Infraprojects Private Limited, approached the Allahabad High Court seeking quashing of FIR No. 642 of 2025 registered at Police Station Noida Sector 39. The High Court allowed investigation to continue but restrained filing of the charge sheet till disposal of the writ petition. The complainant challenged that interim protection before the Supreme Court. The Court examined the growing pattern of alleged illegal alienation of society land, the pendency of numerous civil and criminal proceedings, and the Registrar of Societies’ report revealing rival management groups within the society. Relying on Neeharika Infrastructure and distinguishing Pradnya Pranjal Kulkarni, the Supreme Court held that the High Court’s direction restraining filing of the charge sheet was legally unsustainable.

Decision: The Supreme Court partly allowed the appeal and set aside the Allahabad High Court’s direction restraining submission of the police report under Section 193(3) BNSS. The Investigating Officer was directed to complete the investigation and file the charge sheet in FIR No. 642 of 2025 registered at Police Station Noida Sector 39, Gautam Budh Nagar. Considering the repeated allegations of fraudulent sale of society land, the Court further directed constitution of a Special Investigation Team under the supervision of the Chief Secretary, Uttar Pradesh, with the Registrar of Societies as one of its members, to conduct a fact-finding enquiry regarding alienation of lands belonging to the society. The SIT was directed to identify how society lands had been transferred to third parties and submit its report within three months for further criminal action wherever fraudulent conduct is found. Till completion of the SIT enquiry and investigation, no coercive action was directed to be taken against Respondent No. 2, subject to full cooperation with the investigation. Pending applications stood disposed of.