'No Duty to Verify Title or Genuineness of Documents: Madras High Court Quashes Final Report Against Sub Registrar

In a significant ruling, the Madras High Court, Madurai Bench, presided over by Justice R. Hemalatha, has quashed the final report against M. Suriya Prabha, a Sub Registrar, in the case of Crl.O.P.(MD)No.3643 of 2021. The court observed that there is no legal obligation on registering officers to verify the title or authenticity of documents presented for registration.

The court dealt extensively with the duties of registering officers under Section 52 of the Registration Act, 1908. The ruling clarified that these officials are not required to verify the title or ownership of properties during the registration process.

The case involved allegations of criminal conspiracy in property registration. M. Suriya Prabha, the petitioner and a Sub Registrar, was accused of conspiring in the registration of a fraudulent settlement deed, along with other accused, under IPC sections 420, 423, 465, 468, 471 read with 120(b).

Justice Hemalatha meticulously analyzed Section 52 of the Registration Act, stating, "The Registration Act does not impose a duty on registering officers to verify the title or ownership of properties during registration." The court emphasized that a Sub Registrar’s role is to register documents presented with proper stamp duty and registration charges, without delving into the genuineness of the documents.

Further, the court found no specific allegations or substantive evidence against the petitioner regarding his involvement in any conspiracy to fabricate documents. This led to the conclusion that the final report filed against him was unsustainable.

The High Court quashed the final report against M. Suriya Prabha in C.C.No.435 of 2019. The decision was based on the absence of a legal duty on the part of the Sub Registrar to verify documents and the lack of specific allegations or evidence against the petitioner.

Date of Decision: 04.03.2024.

M.Suriya Prabha v. State & Anr,