Archive · 19 Aug 2026
High Court Denies Bail in Alleged Will Forgery Case
A man asked the court for protection from arrest in a property case.
His sister said he used a fake will to stop her from receiving part of their late mother’s property.
The property was in Ujjain and measured 4,350 square feet.
The will allegedly appeared many years after it was said to have been made.
Experts said it did not have the mother’s thumbprint.
The only surviving witness also said the mother had not signed or approved it.
The property was later changed into the brother’s name and sold to his son.
The High Court said this could involve a crime, not just a family disagreement about property.
It therefore refused to grant anticipatory bail.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court denied anticipatory bail to a man accused of forging his late mother’s will.
The disputed will concerned a 4,350-square-foot property in Ujjain and allegedly excluded the man’s sister from her share.
The Finger Printing Bureau found that the will lacked the mother’s thumb impression, while the sole surviving attesting witness denied signing it.
The sister said the will emerged in 2023, followed by mutation of the property in her brother’s name and its sale to his son.
The court held that the allegations indicated possible document forgery and went beyond a merely civil dispute.
- Who
- The accused man, his sister, his son, and their late mother are central to the case; the Madhya Pradesh High Court heard the bail application.
- What
- The court rejected anticipatory bail in a case alleging that the man forged his mother’s will to deny his sister a property share.
- When
- The purported will was allegedly dated June 4, 2013; it surfaced in 2023, the property was mutated on April 29, 2024, and the High Court later rejected bail.
- Where
- The property is in Ujjain, and the case was heard by the Indore bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court.
- Why
- The court found that the missing thumb impression, the witness’s denial, the property transfers, and other circumstances suggested alleged forgery intended to exclude a female heir.
Prosecution and Sister
Accused and Counsel
Nature of the dispute
Prosecution and Sister
The sister and prosecution alleged that the man used a forged will and related transactions to exclude her from her inheritance, making the matter more than a civil property dispute.
Accused and Counsel
The accused’s counsel argued that the disagreement was essentially civil and that there was no legal evidence establishing forgery.
Authenticity of the will
Prosecution and Sister
The sister relied on the Finger Printing Bureau’s opinion that the will lacked the mother’s thumb impression and on the attesting witness’s denial of its execution.
Accused and Counsel
The applicant’s counsel maintained that the allegations did not amount to sufficient legal evidence of forgery at the bail stage.
Disclosure of earlier bail ruling
Prosecution and Sister
The sister objected that the applicant had not disclosed the earlier rejection of his co-accused son’s anticipatory bail application.
Accused and Counsel
The applicant said the omission was unintentional because he was unaware of those proceedings.
- Court
- Indore bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court
- Property
- A 4,350-square-foot plot in Ujjain
- Purported will date
- June 4, 2013
- Will surfaced
- 2023, according to the sister’s complaint
- Mutation date
- April 29, 2024
- Forensic finding
- The Finger Printing Bureau said the will did not bear the mother’s thumb impression
- Loan
- M/s Shalimar Associates obtained a Rs 1.28 crore loan, with the applicant as co-borrower