Here are the key takeaways from the blog post regarding the legal dispute over ancestral property. This post will also help you understand the importance of Justice for a “coparcener.”:

Birth right and Ancestral Claims:

• Under Indian law, a son acquires, therefore, an immediate right to ancestral property by birth. Consequently, Naresh Kumar Jaiswal claims this right for land in Village Bhatewara (Kon), Mirzapur.+2
• Unauthorised Property Sales: Land records from Khata No. 00004 indicate that the father, Ashok Kumar Jaiswal, sold multiple plots to various third parties. In fact, he began these sales in 2019; however, he did so without the consent of the other coparceners. Consequently, this raises concerns about the legality of these transactions. Ultimately, it is crucial to address the implications of these actions on the rights of the other family members.
• Allegations of Criminal Conduct: Initially, the applicant argues that the father misrepresented the status of ancestral land. Specifically, he claimed it as self-acquired property. Consequently, this misrepresentation facilitated the sales, leading to accusations of Criminal Breach of Trust and Cheating.
• Evidence of Forgery: A significant contradiction exists. Specifically, the father admitted to the police that the property is unpartitioned ancestral land. Yet, he sold portions of it as a sole owner, which suggests forgery of public records under the IPC. Thus, these inconsistencies raise serious questions about the validity of the transactions.
• Systemic Challenges: Police acknowledged “tension and resentment.” They filed a Challani Report on June 18, 2025. Despite this, they initially dismissed the fraud allegations as a purely civil matter.+2
• Naresh Jaiswal successfully filed an RTI (Registration Number SPMZR/R/2026/60090). As a result, he obtained certified copies of sale deeds and police statements. Consequently, these documents proved misrepresentation and significantly supported his case in the Family Court.
• Recommended Legal Action: The post highlights a multi-pronged approach for justice. It includes filing a Partition Suit and seeking a Stay Order (Injunction). Additionally, it involves escalating criminal complaints to higher authorities like the Superintendent of Police.+2 (Justice for a Coparcener)

---

Justice for a Coparcener: Protecting Your Birthright Against Forgery ⚖️

Securing an ancestral property birthright often feels like an uphill battle against a complex legal system. For Naresh Kumar Jaiswal, this struggle is a very real experience. This post examines a significant ongoing dispute involving property rights. It examines the pursuit of justice for a coparcener. It also addresses an alleged breach of trust. Lastly, it highlights the systemic obstacles that hinder police intervention.

---

1. The Core Dispute: Birthright vs. Alienation 🏠

The concept of ancestral property, therefore, forms the foundation of this case. Under Indian law, a son acquires a right to ancestral property at birth. This, in turn, ensures justice for a coparcener. Consequently, Naresh Kumar Jaiswal claims this right for land in Village Bhatewara (Kon), Mirzapur.

However, land records reveal that several transactions now threaten this right:

• Unauthorized Sales: Since 2019, the seller has moved portions of land from Khata No. 00004 to various third parties.+1
• Specific Transactions: Records show the father sold land to Smt. Ketika (925 sq. ft.), Smt. Kajal Bharti (1,110 sq. ft.), and Mulhara Devi (1,369 sq. ft.).+1
• The Conflict: The father, Ashok Kumar Jaiswal, allegedly executed these sales without the consent of the coparceners. He did not demonstrate “legal necessity,” which remains the only valid ground for a Karta to sell ancestral assets.+1

---

2. Criminal Breach of Trust and Cheating ⛓️ (Justice for a Coparcener)

Authorities often label property disputes as “civil matters,” but certain actions cross into criminality. The applicant argues that his father committed the following acts:

• Criminal Breach of Trust: Ashok Kumar Jaiswal serves in two important roles. As a father and Karta, he is a legal trustee of the ancestral property. He violates that trust when he sells property for personal gain at the expense of his children’s shares.+3
• Cheating: The seller deceives the government if he misrepresents the land as “self-acquired” to the Registrar. He also deceives the legal heirs.

The pending Family Court case (Criminal Misc. Case/915/2021) deepens this complexity. If a person sells assets while litigation is active, the law considers it a fraudulent attempt. This is seen as an effort to defeat the court’s future judgment.

---

3. The Forgery Allegation: IPC 467, 468, and 471 ✍️ (Justice for a Coparcener)

The most serious allegations involve the forgery of public records. Forgery in land deals typically involves two methods:

1. False Affidavits: Firstly, the seller submits signed declarations to the Sub-Registrar, claiming the property has no disputes or is “self-acquired.”
2. Secondly, the seller misuses these false claims to update the Bhulekh (Revenue Records).

Naresh Jaiswal highlights a critical contradiction in the police reports:

• During a police inquiry in September 2025, the father admitted that the ancestral house and land remain unpartitioned.+1
• Yet, the land records show he sold specific plots as if he owned them exclusively.+1
• This discrepancy provides the necessary evidence for charges. These charges concern the forgery of public records and the use of forged documents as genuine.

---

4. Systemic Hurdles: The Civil Matter Trap 🛑(Justice for a Coparcener)

Local police frequently dismiss property fraud as a purely civil dispute. In this case, the Circle Officer of Mirzapur concluded the matter was civil. He suggested the parties seek relief in court.+1

However, this conclusion ignores the preventive action the police already took:

• On June 18, 2025, police filed a Challani Report under Sections 126/135 of the BNSS.+1
• The police acknowledged that “tension and resentment” between the parties could lead to a serious incident.

The police might acknowledge the threat of violence. They may also admit the unpartitioned status. If they refuse to register an FIR for the underlying fraud, the applicant must escalate the matter. The applicant should contact the Superintendent of Police and the Chief Minister’s Secretariat.+1

---

5. The Power of the Right to Information (RTI) 💡

Naresh Jaiswal has utilized the RTI Act to break the deadlock. By filing Registration Number SPMZR/R/2026/60090, he seeks:

• Certified copies of the Sale Deeds to examine the seller’s specific claims.
• Copies of Affidavits the father submitted during registration.
• The full Police Investigation Report to hold officers accountable for their findings.

This evidence-based approach is vital. Certified documents carry significant weight in court. They prove a crime occurred, even if the police initially hesitated to investigate. (Justice for a Coparcener)

---

6. Steps Toward Resolution 🏁(Justice for a Coparcener)

Justice requires a multi-pronged strategy:

1. Partition Suit: File a civil suit to legally define and separate your share.
2. Stay Order (Injunction): Seek an immediate court order to stop further sales of the property.
3. Criminal Complaints: Escalate “cheating and forgery” claims to higher authorities (SSP/DIG) if the local station fails to act.
4. RTI for Evidence: Use the RTI Act to gather documents that prove misrepresentation.

---

Conclusion

The case of Naresh Kumar Jaiswal vs. Ashok Kumar Jaiswal highlights how family betrayal and administrative apathy can threaten ancestral rights. Consequently, the applicant takes persistent legal action. Furthermore, they also make direct appeals to the Superintendent of Police. Ultimately, these efforts aim to ensure that the law of the land prevails.

Based on the documents provided and your recent submissions, here are the compiled details for the relevanBased on the documents provided and your recent submissions, therefore, here are the compiled details for the relevant public authorities and application identifiers:t public authorities and application identifiers:

1. Key Application Identifiers

• Current Grievance ID: GOVUP/E/2026/0022145 (Status: Received and Forwarded on 21/02/2026).
• RTI Registration Number: SPMZR/R/2026/60090 (Filed with SP Office Mirzapur).
• Previous Closed Grievance: 60000250184560 (Filed 07/08/2025, closed 09/09/2025).+1
• Court Case Number: Criminal Misc. Case/915/2021 (Priyanka Jaiswal vs. Naresh Kumar Jaiswal).+1

2. Concerned Public Authorities & Contact Details

Authority	Name / Designation	Contact Details
CM Secretariat, Lucknow	Shri Arvind Mohan (Joint Secretary)	Email: arvind.12574@gov.in Phone: 0522-2226350
SP Office Mirzapur (RTI)	Manish Kumar Mishra (ASP Operation)	Email: aspopmzp@gmail.com Phone: 9473567333
SP Office Mirzapur (Nodal)	Nodal Officer Details	Email: addlspopmzr@gmail.com Phone: 9473567333
Circle Officer (Sadar)	Amar Bahadur (CO Sadar)	Investigating Officer for previous report +1
Police Station Chilh	Inspector Vijay Shankar Singh	Rank: Inspector (SHO/In-charge)

Export to Sheets

3. Mobile Numbers from Records (Justice for a Coparcener)

• Naresh Kumar Jaiswal (Applicant): 9005697304.+2
• Ashok Kumar Jaiswal (Father/Opponent): 9889496371.
• Brijesh Kumar alias Baba (Witness): 8887878944.
• Nagendra (Witness): 9935766419.
• Shitala Prasad Jaiswal (Neighbor): 8127364082.

4. Web Links for Monitoring

• Grievance Tracking: jansunwai.up.nic.in (For UP IGRS Portal updates).
• Land Records: upbhulekh.gov.in (For Village Bhatewara land status).
• Court Status: ecourts.gov.in (Search for Case 915/2021, Family Court Mirzapur).
• RTI Status: rtionline.up.gov.in (For tracking Registration SPMZR/R/2026/60090).

Would you like me to draft a summary email? It will contain all these details. You can send it to your legal counsel.