On September 14, 2025, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India delivered its judgment in State of Rajasthan v. Ajit Singh & Others in SLP (C) Nos. 14721-14723/2024. Through this judgment, the Hon’ble Court held that once a Will has been validly executed and probate has been granted by a competent court, the State cannot claim succession to the estate under the doctrine of escheat. The Hon’ble Court ruled that Section 29 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, which deals with escheat, applies only in cases of intestate succession where no heirs exist under the statutory scheme. Testamentary succession, once proved, overrides such claims by the State.
The Division Bench comprised Hon’ble Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Hon’ble Justice S.C. Sharma. The case concerned the estate of Raja Bahadur Sardar Singh of Khetri, who executed a Will on October 30, 1985, bequeathing his properties to the Khetri Trust. After his death in 1987, the State of Rajasthan invoked the Rajasthan Escheats Regulation Act, 1956, contending that he had died intestate and without legal heirs. On this basis, the State claimed that the property vested in it by escheat.
The Will was challenged but was upheld, and probate was granted in favour of Khetri Trust by the competent court. Dissatisfied, the State sought to contest the probate proceedings, insisting that escheat applied notwithstanding the Will. The matter ultimately reached the Supreme Court for authoritative determination of the State’s claim. The Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that the scheme of the Hindu Succession Act draws a clear distinction between intestate succession and testamentary succession. Section 29, which incorporates the doctrine of escheat, operates only where the deceased dies without making a Will and no heirs are available under Class I, Class II, or among agnates or cognates.
The Hon’ble Court further held that the grant of probate is conclusive proof of the validity of a Will, binding not only upon the parties to the proceeding but also upon the State. Once probate has been granted, the Will stands proved in law, and the estate must devolve in accordance with its terms. The invocation of the Rajasthan Escheats Regulation Act in such circumstances was held to be misconceived.
The Court emphasized that the doctrine of escheat is an exception to the general principles of succession and cannot be invoked lightly. It comes into operation only when no lawful heirs or testamentary dispositions exist. In the present case, the Will had already been judicially recognized and probate granted, thereby leaving no scope for the application of escheat.
The Hon’ble Court dismissed the appeals filed by the State of Rajasthan, holding that the State had no locus standi to question the grant of probate. It upheld the testamentary succession in favour of Khetri Trust, ruling that the properties devolved in accordance with the Will executed by Raja Bahadur Sardar Singh. The attempt of the State to claim the estate under escheat was categorically rejected. This judgment reinforces the legal principle that testamentary succession, once conclusively established by a grant of probate, cannot be displaced by the doctrine of escheat. It safeguards the sanctity of Wills and probate proceedings, ensuring certainty in succession law. By confining the operation of Section 29 of the Hindu Succession Act strictly to cases of intestacy, the judgment strengthens the jurisprudence protecting the right of individuals to dispose of their property through testamentary instruments.