The Supreme Court has stepped in to shield a 71-year-old woman from arrest in a case concerning the alleged forgery of a land sale deed dating back to 1971, strongly criticising the manner in which the Allahabad High Court handled her plea for protection.
A bench of Justices Surya Kant, Ujjal Bhuyan, and N Kotiswar Singh stayed the arrest of Usha Mishra, who was booked in June 2023 under charges of cheating and forgery by Gonda district police. The FIR was lodged at the behest of advocate Daduram Shukla, accusing Mishra of links to a fabricated sale deed executed on August 20, 1971.
The apex court not only questioned the role of the police in registering the FIR but also pulled up the complainant himself. It issued a bailable warrant of ₹10,000 against Shukla, directing him to appear before the court and show cause why exemplary costs should not be imposed for initiating proceedings based on a transaction more than five decades old.
The Lucknow Commissioner of Police has been tasked with executing the warrant, with the court warning that if Shukla evades notice, non-bailable warrants will follow.
The bench expressed dismay at the Allahabad High Court’s May 27 order which cancelled Mishra’s anticipatory bail, remarking that the decision was passed in a “casual manner” and warranted serious introspection.
“It is quite unfortunate that the Allahabad High Court has illogically turned down the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, a 71-year-old woman, when she is neither seller, nor purchaser, nor a witness or beneficiary of the sale deed,” the Supreme Court observed.
The bench directed the station house officer of the concerned police station to produce the original records of the FIR and explain why proceedings that appear to be “an abuse of process of law” should not be quashed.
Mishra, who is said to be the mother-in-law of the main accused Brijesh Kumar Awasthi—allegedly a member of a forgery racket—argued that she was being falsely implicated. She clarified that she could not appear before the investigating officer on May 19, 2025, due to ill health but complied a week later on May 26 to record her statement under Section 161 CrPC.
The matter will now be heard on October 8, with the Supreme Court keeping a close watch on the conduct of both the complainant and the investigating authorities.
