SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(J&K) 711

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH
SANJAY DHAR, J.
Maroofa Nazki – Appellant
Versus
Govt. of J&K – Respondent
CRM(M) No. 175/2022 & CrlM No. 573/2022
Decided on : 31-05-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Nisar Ahmad
For the Respondent: Mohsin Qadri; Maha Majeed

Headnote:(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482 - FIR No. 28/2022 - Allegation of appointment based on fake certificates - The petitioner challenged the FIR filed under sections 420, 468, and 471 RPC, asserting her qualifications as under-matric - The court found that the petitioner had never submitted a matriculation certificate and had requested corrections in her records. The court noted, "registration of impugned FIR to the extent of the petitioner is nothing but an abuse of process of law". (Paras 1-20)

(B) Preliminary Verification - Evidence obtained during preliminary verification showed no matriculation certificate was available, reinforcing that the qualification recorded was accurate and no fake documents were submitted by the petitioner. (Paras 10, 12)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner was accused of acquiring her job based on false documents; however, she claimed her records accurately reflected her qualifications. Previous representations for correction of her qualification were noted, and an enquiry revealed inaccuracies were corrected as per court direction.

Findings of Court:
The court concluded the registration of FIR against the petitioner was improper due to lack of evidence substantiating the allegations, noting that the petitioner proactively sought to rectify her records.

Issues: Whether the FIR against the petitioner was warranted given evidence of her credentials and complaints of inaccuracies in her service record.

Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that allowing the investigation to proceed would constitute an abuse of legal process, as sufficient material existed to exonerate the petitioner.

Result: The petition is allowed and the impugned FIR against the petitioner is quashed.

Table of Content
1. fir challenges regarding fake certificates. (Para 1 , 2)
2. petitioner's justification for discrepancies. (Para 3 , 4)
3. departmental challenges and inquiries. (Para 5 , 6)
4. review of preliminary verification records. (Para 8 , 9 , 10)
5. evidence supporting petitioner's claims. (Para 11 , 12 , 13)
6. no grounds for registration of fir. (Para 14 , 15)
7. abuse of process due to unsubstantiated fir. (Para 16)
8. court's rejection of further investigation. (Para 17 , 18)
9. quashing of fir against the petitioner. (Para 19 , 20)

JUDGEMENT

1. The petitioner has challenged FIR No. 28/2022 for offences under Section 420 , 468, 471 RPC registered with Police Station, Crime Branch, Kashmir.

2. As per the impugned FIR, a complaint was received by Crime Branch, Kashmir, from one Mohammad Aslam Ganie, wherein it was alleged that three employees of J&K Handicrafts Department including the petitioner herein have been appointed in the Department on the basis of fake matriculation certificates. A Preliminary Verification of the allegations made in the complaint was undertaken by the Crime Branch, Kashmir, and during the probe, it was substantiated that accused including the petitioner herein have procured their appointment on the basis of fake and forged matriculation certificates. As per the impugned FIR offences under Section 420 , 468, 471 RPC stand, prima facie, established against the accused including the petitioner herein.

3. The petitioner has challenged the impugned FIR by stating that her date of birth in the service record was recorded at the time of her initial appointment as 03.06.1964 on the basis of 9th class certificate issued by the school wherein she had studied. According to the petitioner, she had submitted discharge certificate issued by Hindu Education Institution, Srinagar, and on the basis of this certificate, her date of birth was incorporated in the service record. It has been submitted that in the year 2006, when the petitioner gained knowledge that her credentials have been wrongly mentioned in her service book, inasmuch as it had been mentioned therein that she is a matriculate, she filed an application before the competent authority on 08.11.2006, stating therein that her academic qualification has been wrongly mentioned as matric instead of under-matric. Accordingly, the petitioner is stated to have sought rectification of her credentials in her service records. When the Department did not take any action on her application, the petitioner is stated to have made another application on 05.04.2007. On 28.08.2007, the petitioner was advised to deposit the matriculation certificate and in response to the said communication she, vide her letter dated 30.08.2007, informed the Department that she has never submitted any matriculation certificate as she is not a matriculate. She further requested the department that correction may be effected in her service record in this regard.

4. A series of representations are stated to have been made by the petitioner to her department for correction of her service record but without any success, which compelled her to file a writ petition before this Court. The same was disposed of by this Court on 26.07.2017 and a direction was issued to the Department to accord consideration to the claim of the petitioner.

5. It has been submitted that Crime Branch, Kashmir, forwarded a complaint to the petitioner's department, whereafter a committee was constituted comprising Joint Director, Handicrafts and Assistant Director, Handicrafts, for enquiring into the matter. After holding enquiry into the complaint, it was found that the petitioner had never submitted matriculation certificate and her date of birth was recorded on the basis of 9th class certificate. It has been submitted that the documents relating to aforesaid events were furnished by the department to the respondents during Preliminary Verification but despite this, the impugned FIR has been lodged against the petitioner.

      Click Here to Read the rest of this document
      1
      2
      3
      4
      5
      6
      7
      8
      9
      10
      11
      SupremeToday Portrait Ad
      supreme today icon
      logo-black

      An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

      Please visit our Training & Support
      Center or Contact Us for assistance

      qr

      Scan Me!

      India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

      For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

      whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
      whatsapp-icon Back to top