1. The police cannot seize the original sale deed held by the sub registrar's office, they can obtain the certified copy of the sale deed.  in fact the original sale deed will be held by the buyer and not the sub registrar.

2. The police will not behind the details of the civil cases filed by the accused.  The police generally will confine to the complaint made by the complainant and may proceed with the investigation relevant to the complaint contents. They may not include the civil cases  because it is beyond their scope of investigation.

3. The police do not have powers to verify the veracity of the genuineness of the UIDAI issued identity card, you have done it on your own curiosity. You may firstly bear it in mind that the police will be confined to the complaint and the investigations thereon hence they will not travel beyond the contents of the complaint.  As a complainant you may produce the documents before court during your chief examination to establish the acts of fraud by the accused.  

police officers do have the power to seize original documents, including a fraudulent sale deed from the Sub-Registrar's office, as part of a criminal investigation. 

2) civil and criminal cases are completely separate and would not be mentioned in supplementary charge sheet 

3) 

In the criminal case involving the fraud sale deed executed on your father’s plot by an accused impersonating your father’s son, the police are within their powers to obtain the original sale deed from the sub‑registrar for forensic analysis. This is because the original registered sale deed is primary evidence and is in the lawful custody of the sub‑registrar. The investigating officer can formally requisition it under the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code, either through a court order or by issuing a written request in the course of investigation, and the sub‑registrar is bound to comply. Once seized, the document can be sent to a forensic science laboratory for signature and thumb‑impression verification while maintaining proper chain of custody for evidentiary purposes.

The fact that the accused has filed multiple civil cases in respect of the same property with false statements can be noted in the chargesheet if these proceedings demonstrate a continuing pattern of harassment, intimidation, or obstruction. The police can include these details in the narrative portion of the chargesheet as part of the background to show the accused’s conduct after the offence and their intent to continue causing harm, which may help the prosecution establish motive, malice, and the absence of bona fides.

With respect to the fake Aadhaar card allegedly submitted by the accused at the time of executing the sale deed, while the police may not directly obtain records from UIDAI without following the official request channels under the Aadhaar Act, they can use publicly available tools such as the verification facility on the UIDAI website. If, on entering the Aadhaar number, the result shows “no matching Aadhaar number found” or a similar non‑existence message, a screenshot of this result taken from the official site can be included in the chargesheet to support the allegation that the Aadhaar used was fabricated. For stronger evidentiary value, the police can have this verification process recorded and certified, or they may request UIDAI confirmation through official correspondence to place on record.

Taken together, these actions—securing the original fraud sale deed for forensic examination, documenting the accused’s subsequent vexatious civil litigation, and recording proof of the fake Aadhaar—will help create a comprehensive body of evidence against the accused for use during prosecution.

Even if it’s shown same doesn’t have any relevance until proved 

all the said evidence placed in chargesheet doesn’t become evidence automatically it needs to be proved in court by party relying on it

1. An offence under Section 471 is committed by forging Aadhar card and using it as genuine. An offence of forgery public record under Section 466 is committed. No need to verify and aadhar online, file criminal complaint, Court will direct police to do all investigation and file report.
2. You can file criminal complaint against him under Section 82 of Registration Act for making false statement before Registrar as it is not possible for him to prove that he is son of your father. Punishment for offence under Section 82 is imprisonment  up to ten years. Such complaint  can be directly filed by affected person even while civil cases are pending, there is Supreme Court judgment on that point.
3. If police is not cooperating you file application in Court and seek production of document from the office of Sub-Registrar.
4. All false statements made in Civil case can be mentioned in charge sheet to establish his conduct.

• Seizure of Original Fraud Sale Deed – Yes, police can obtain the original from the Sub-Registrar through proper procedure. They issue a written requisition or secure a court order under CrPC Sections 91 & 102 to seize it for forensic examination.

• Civil Cases & False Statements – Police can mention the existence of related civil cases and pattern of harassment in the supplementary chargesheet if it shows motive, intent, or continued conduct, but they won’t decide civil disputes—only record them as supporting facts.

• Fake Aadhaar Proof – Police cannot directly access UIDAI records without legal sanction, but your screenshot showing “Aadhaar number not found” can be attached as indicative evidence. However, for it to be strong proof in court, they should ideally obtain an official UIDAI verification report via magistrate’s order.

Here’s my advice on your queries, point-by-point, based on how the law and procedure generally work in India:

1. Whether police can seize the original fraud sale deed from the Sub-Registrar for forensic analysis
Yes. The police have the power under Section 102 CrPC to seize any document which is alleged or suspected to be stolen or related to an offence. They can issue a written requisition to the concerned Sub-Registrar requesting the original fraud sale deed for the purposes of investigation and send it for FSL (Forensic Science Laboratory) examination.

The Sub-Registrar is bound to cooperate, as per Section 91 CrPC (summons to produce document) or Section 93 CrPC(search warrant for document), depending on how the IO proceeds.
It’s important that the document is sent in a sealed cover directly to the FSL to maintain chain of custody and avoid any later objection from the accused.

2. Mentioning pending civil cases and false statements in the chargesheet
Yes, the police can and should mention it — not as a ground to prove guilt in the present FIR, but as background and conduct evidence under Section 8 of the Indian Evidence Act.

The fact that the accused is simultaneously filing vexatious civil cases on the same property, and making inconsistent or false statements, can be used to show mens rea (criminal intent) and a continuing pattern of harassment.
However, the police must present this carefully in the chargesheet — they cannot make the civil court’s findings part of criminal trial evidence unless those findings are final and not under challenge.

3. Using Aadhaar verification failure as proof
Police are right that they cannot directly obtain data from UIDAI without following procedure, because UIDAI’s database is protected under the Aadhaar Act, 2016. They must route it through a lawful request (often through the court, or under specific provisions given to law enforcement agencies).

That said — your screenshot showing that the number entered on UIDAI’s verification page is “not found” can be a supporting lead, but by itself it is not conclusive proof admissible in court. Screenshots from websites can be challenged unless backed by a Section 65B Evidence Act certificate for electronic evidence.

Best practice:

• The IO should make an official request to UIDAI via court order to confirm in writing that no Aadhaar exists for that number.

• In the meantime, your screenshot can be annexed in the chargesheet as prima facie indication pending official confirmation.

Next steps I’d advise your side to ensure

• Request the IO in writing (retain a copy) to seize the original deed from the Sub-Registrar and send for FSL comparison of signatures and thumb impression.

• Ask the IO to record in the chargesheet the pendency of frivolous civil suits as part of the accused’s conduct.

• Insist on a formal UIDAI verification of the Aadhaar number used in the fraudulent transaction.

• Follow up in writing to create a paper trail — in case the IO later says “we didn’t have powers,” you can show you asked for it and they failed to act.

IO is correct . They are separate proceedings 

The pleadings made in a civil proceedings can be referred during cross examination by producing certified copies of the plaint of that civil case during trial proceedings in the criminal case.

The police cannot go beyond the contents of the complaint before it hence you cannot compel police to include those statements in the charge sheet.

If you had included the grievances in the complaint as an offence committed by then the police will investigate into the crime and not the issue which was not included in the original complaint 

From a legal standpoint, the police’s statement is only partially correct. It is true that civil and criminal proceedings are independent in nature — the outcome or pleadings in one do not automatically bind the other. However, that does not mean statements made in civil pleadings are entirely irrelevant for a criminal case.

Under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, particularly Sections 17 to 21, any admission made by a party — whether in a civil case, affidavit, written statement, or other pleadings — can be used as admission evidence in another proceeding, including a criminal trial, provided it is relevant to the facts in issue. If the accused, in a civil proceeding, has made a statement that directly relates to the facts under investigation in the criminal case, such statement can be collected as evidence and cited in the chargesheet as supporting material.

The police are not barred from referring to such statements; rather, it depends on whether they consider it relevant to the commission of the alleged offence. Even if they choose not to include it in the chargesheet, you can produce certified copies of the civil pleadings yourself before the court during trial under Section 294 CrPC or through an application for exhibiting documents. Courts have accepted pleadings from other proceedings as corroborative or contradictory evidence in criminal matters.

In short — independence of proceedings does not mean a blanket prohibition; relevancy is the key. If the civil statements contain admissions or contradictions useful to your defence, they can form part of the record, even if the police decline to include them.

Thanks and Regards,
Advocate Aman Verma
Legal Corridor

The police are correct in stating that civil and criminal proceedings are independent of each other under Indian law. The findings, pleadings, or statements made in a civil case do not automatically become part of a criminal proceeding, nor are they binding or directly relevant unless there is a specific overlap in facts that is material to the criminal offences charged. Courts and investigating agencies are required to independently assess evidence in criminal cases according to the standards and procedure laid down in the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), which is focused on establishing criminal liability beyond reasonable doubt, rather than preponderance of probabilities as in civil matters.

Generally, the police prepare a chargesheet under Section 173(2) of the CrPC by including only material strictly relevant to the criminal investigation—such as witness statements recorded during the investigation, documentary evidence discovered, and facts directly related to the alleged offences. They ordinarily do not—and, by law or practice, should not—transcribe entire statements or pleadings made by the accused in parallel civil litigation into the chargesheet. The rationale is that those civil court pleadings are made in a different legal context and the accused may be asserting defences or claims relevant to a civil dispute, not admissions or confessions of crime.

However, if the police have come across civil proceedings or pleadings where the accused has made admissions or statements that are directly relevant to, or indicative of, intent, knowledge, or conduct (especially if falsehood or forgery is alleged), the substance of such conduct can be briefly noted in the narrative/background portion of the chargesheet to demonstrate a pattern of harassment, intimidation, or bad faith. Still, it is for the court trying the criminal case to determine whether such statements are relevant and admissible as corroborative or circumstantial evidence, not primary evidence of guilt in the criminal matter.

Therefore:

• The police are procedurally right in their primary position that civil and criminal proceedings are separate, and that the focus in the chargesheet must be on the evidence found during the criminal investigation.

• While details of harassment—such as the fact that the accused is filing vexatious civil cases—can be noted as part of the background in the chargesheet, the actual content or statements from civil pleadings are not, as a general rule, annexed or transcribed in the criminal chargesheet.

• If particular statements in civil pleadings amount to admissions of crime, are forged, or are otherwise directly material, the police may refer to their existence or obtain certified copies to present as context, but the ultimate relevance or evidentiary value is for the criminal court to decide.

In summary, statements made by the accused in civil pleadings are not automatically part of a criminal chargesheet, and the police are justified in preparing the chargesheet as per criminal investigation requirements. Any attempt to rely on such statements in the criminal trial would need to be specifically justified as per relevance and evidentiary rules, and their admissibility will be assessed by the court

if the same is not included in chargesheet you can file appropriate application in court seeking further investigation if same are necessary in the said matter

The original agreement after due registration are returned to party by registrar against sign on delivery of document register by party and also on production of the original registration fees paid receipt on which registrar office put stamp delivered. Registration formalities are completed, after which the documents are returned to party within approximately an hour of completion of registration formalities.

2)The complete documents along with all above mentioned details are then scanned by registrar office and preserved as a permanent record at registrar’s office

The original is always with owner the registrar always have registered copy

The egistrar does not retain the original sale deed after registration of immovable property. 

After registration, the document is returned to the person who presented it for registration, typically the buyer. 

The registrar maintains a record of the registered document, but the original is given back to the relevant party. 

While the registrar keeps a record of the document, the original is returned to the party who presented it for registration, usually the buyer. 

Registration of a sale deed makes it a permanent public record. This means anyone can inspect the document and obtain certified copies from the Sub-Registrar's office. 

If the original is lost or misplaced, a certified copy can be obtained from the Sub-Registrar's office. 

1. Original Sale Deed – The original registered deed is always returned to the buyer. The Sub-Registrar’s office only keeps scanned images and certified copies with original signatures/thumb impressions. For forensic, police can requisition a certified copy from the Sub-Registrar.

2. Civil Case Statements – Civil and criminal are separate. Police usually won’t include civil pleadings in the chargesheet. However, you can later file certified copies before the criminal court to show falsehood/harassment.

3. Fake Aadhaar – Screenshot is only supporting. For stronger proof, police should seek official UIDAI confirmation via court order.

1. The allegations are about the acts of forgery, cheating, fraud and impersonation etc., which are to be proved on the basis of the substantial information and documentary evidences the complainant relies upon, the original sale deed executed by the seller in favor of the buyer shall be with the buyer only.

2. It is for the police to decide the course of investigation on the basis of the complaint lying before them, we cannot predict..

3. The complaint is not about missing or stolen document, it i about the acts of forgery or any other related offence.

4. The accused can very well exercise his constitutionally protected rights.

5. The registrar will be having scanned copies of the registration documents, the person who would rely upon them hs to apply for certified copies. 

1. Not necessary it can be decided without any original deed if you satisfy the court the genuine reason for not having original deed

2. yes it can be issued to accused 

3. Not in all circumstances 

4.Yes

5. yes if original deed is registered 

1) it is not mandatory to have original sale  deed 

2) certified copies of sale  deeds ,witness testimonies can be considered by court if original sale deed is not available 

3) Evidence like the conduct of parties involved, financial transactions related to the property, and other relevant records can be used to build a case, even in the absence of the original document. 

4) police can call upon accused to produce original sale deed 

5)the police can search and potentially seize an original sale deed from the premises of an accused person, but they generally need a court warrant, especially if it's their residence.

6) accused cannot refuse to give original documents 

• Original deed – Yes, in forgery cases the original sale deed is crucial for forensic proof. Certified copies alone may be weak.

• Section 91 CrPC – Police can issue notice to the accused to produce the original deed. If they refuse/claim it’s lost, they may face action under Sec. 201 IPC (destruction of evidence).

• Seizure – Police can search and seize the deed from accused premises; usually with court’s permission.

• Article 20(3) – Protection from self-incrimination applies to giving testimony, not to producing documents already in existence. So the accused cannot refuse on this ground.

• Registrar records – Registrar keeps scanned/certified copies with signatures and thumbprints. These can be used for forensic comparison if original is unavailable.

In a forgery case involving a fraud sale deed, it is critical to have the original document for forensic examination since the original contains the actual signatures, thumb impressions, and handwriting patterns necessary for scientific verification. The sub-registrar generally retains the original registered document or document of title while the buyer/seller gets certified copies; this may vary by jurisdiction but typically the original remains accessible in official custody for legal proceedings.

If the original deed is not with the sub-registrar and the accused holds it, the police can issue a notice under Section 91 CrPC compelling production of the document. Failure to comply or loss of the document may raise suspicion of tampering, and police can initiate action under Section 201 IPC for destruction or concealment of evidence.

Police have the power to conduct searches and seize evidence, including original documents, under proper authorization. If a search is necessary at the accused’s premises, the police generally require court permission via warrant, unless exigent circumstances justify immediate search.

The accused cannot hide behind Article 20(3) protection against self-incrimination to refuse production of documents required as evidence. While protections exist against compelled testimonial incrimination, producing physical evidence like documents is not protected.

The registrar maintains original thumbprints and signatures of parties during registration processes, which can be used for forensic comparison. These official records aid in matching forged signatures against authentic ones.

Regarding your queries on civil cases filed by the accused: Civil and criminal proceedings are legally independent. Police may note vexatious litigation as context but generally cannot include detailed civil pleadings or alleged false statements in the chargesheet. It is for the criminal court to assess the evidentiary value of such civil case documents.

In summary, to robustly prove forgery, the original fraud sale deed must be procured through legal means by police from registered custody or accused. The registrar's records serve as authoritative references for signature verification. The accused cannot avoid document production citing constitutional protections. Parallel civil claims by the accused have limited impact on the criminal chargesheet but can be relevant background.

If you require assistance with legal steps to obtain documents, police follow-up, or representation in criminal proceedings, you are welcome to contact me for confidential, privileged advice and support.