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
| 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.
The court upheld the FIR against the petitioner for forgery, emphasizing that evidence collected during the investigation justified the charges and the FIR could not be quashed.
The court held that the date of birth in a matriculation certificate is authoritative over an affidavit, and manipulative actions for personal gain constitute fraud.
There was erasing in Register of Gram Panchyat for showing date of birth on right hand side of register without there being any corresponding entry.
The date of birth recorded in the H.S.L.C.E. Certificate is authoritative for retirement purposes, and recovery of excess salary for overstaying must consider shared negligence.
The court emphasized the importance of evidence and approval for any alterations made in official records, especially regarding personal details such as date of birth.
District Magistrate cannot be permitted under law and under an administrative system which is governed by constitution and Rule of law.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.