Reported By:
Last Updated:
The Allahabad High Court was shocked to discover that the FIR had been filed and statements recorded as if the deceased were alive. (Getty)
The bench of Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery dismissed an FIR filed in 2014 in a land dispute case in Kushinagar, which was supposedly filed by an individual who had passed away in 2011
In a bizarre turn of events, the Allahabad High Court dealt with a land dispute case allegedly filed by a “ghost”, criticising the police for their mishandling of the situation.
The bench of Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery dismissed an FIR filed in 2014 in a land dispute case in Kushinagar, which was supposedly filed by an individual who had passed away in 2011.
In 2014, an FIR was lodged against five persons by one Shabd Prakash, despite his death three years earlier. Despite this, the investigating officer proceeded to record statements and submit a chargesheet, allowing the case to move forward.
When the case reached the high court, Justice Shamshery questioned the Superintendent of Police (SP) of Kushinagar, raising concerns about how a deceased person could file an FIR.
The accused, Purushottam Singh, his brothers, and sons challenged the police chargesheet. Their counsel, Advocate Rajesh Kumar Singh, presented a report submitted by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kushinagar, on basis of statement of Prakash’s wife along with a copy of his death certificate.
The court was shocked to discover that the FIR had been filed and statements recorded as if the deceased were alive.
After reviewing the details, the court not only quashed the entire proceedings against the accused but also directed the SP to take note of the facts of the case.
“A ghost is creating trouble for innocent persons by lodging an FIR, giving his statement,” the court stressed and asked the SP to conduct an inquiry against the investigating officer concerned.
Apart from that, the court noted that in 2023, an advocate filed a vakalatnama on behalf of Shabd Prakash by his wife Mamta Devi without disclosing that Prakash had died even before lodging the FIR.
Therefore, the court directed a copy of the order to be sent to the president of the High Court Bar Association for him to advise the advocate concerned to remain cautious in future.
