State of Rajasthan v. Ajit Singh & Others, 2025
The Supreme Court reaffirmed the strict scope of Section 29 of the Hindu Succession Act: it only applies in true cases of intestacy.
Judgement Details
Court
Supreme Court of India
Date of Decision
16 September 2025
Judges
Justice B.V. Nagarathna & Justice S.C. Sharma
Citation
Acts / Provisions
Facts of the Case
-
Raja Bahadur Sardar Singh of Khetri (Rajasthan) died in 1987, having executed a Will dated October 30, 1985.
-
The Will bequeathed his entire estate to a public charitable trust, “Khetri Trust.”
-
Despite the Will, the State of Rajasthan took possession of the estate, invoking the Rajasthan Escheats Act, claiming there were no heirs.
-
The State challenged the Will's validity before the Delhi High Court, which upheld the Will and granted probate based on evidence from attesting witnesses.
-
The State then approached the Supreme Court, arguing it had locus standi under the doctrine of escheat.
Issues
-
Whether the State Government has locus standi to challenge a Will when probate has already been granted.
-
When can the doctrine of escheat under Section 29 of the Hindu Succession Act be invoked?
-
Whether a Will's probate can be challenged by the State or only by legal heirs under the Act.
Judgement
-
The Supreme Court dismissed the State's challenge, holding that once a Will is executed and probate granted, the State has no locus standi.
-
The doctrine of escheat under Section 29 applies only in cases of intestate succession where no legal heirs exist.
-
The Court affirmed that this case was one of testamentary succession, not intestate.
-
Only heirs who would succeed if the Will failed can challenge the probate under Section 263 of the Indian Succession Act.
Held
-
Section 29 does not apply in this case as the deceased had executed a valid Will and probate was granted.
-
The State is a stranger to probate and succession proceedings where testamentary succession is involved.
-
Only Class I or II heirs can challenge probate; the State cannot intervene until and unless there’s complete failure of heirs under intestate succession.
Analysis
-
The Supreme Court reaffirmed the strict scope of Section 29 of the Hindu Succession Act: it only applies in true cases of intestacy.
-
The State cannot act pre-emptively to claim property just because it suspects the absence of heirs.
-
The ruling emphasizes probate finality and limits State intervention, strengthening the sanctity of Wills and testamentary autonomy.
-
It clarifies the procedural safeguard under Section 263 of the Indian Succession Act – only heirs with a legitimate claim under intestate succession may seek revocation of probate.
-
The ruling also limits misuse of escheat laws by state governments and protects the rights of private charitable trusts.