The prosecution must establish forgery to sustain charges of cheating. Without establishing forgery, the allegation of cheating cannot be sustained.

ORDER :

Maninder S. Bhatti, J.

The instant order will governs M.Cr.C.No.492/2022 where challenge is made to the order of framing of charge and also M.Cr.C.No.6432/2017 by which the filing of charge-sheet is being assailed in the same crime number. Thus, both the matters are being decided by its composite order.

By invoking inherent power of this Court conceived by Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 (for short ‘Cr.P.C.’), the petitioner is seeking quashment of the order dated 18.11.2021, whereby charges have been framed by the trial Court in respect of the offences punishable under Sections 420, 468, 471 of IPC and Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, against the petitioner; also the statement of charges dated 07.12.2021; and all consequential proceedings thereon.

2. The case of the prosecution in a nutshell, is to the effect that, one Shri B.D. Pandey made a complaint against the petitioner, who at the relevant time was holding the post of Joint Director, School Education, Legal Cell, Jabalpur. In the said complaint which was made to the Economic Offences Wing, Bhopal, numbers of allegations were leveled against the present petitioner relating to securing promotion on the post of Principal on the basis of a false experience certificate, allegation of disproportionate income out of which the petitioner purchased a car as well as flat in Sanjeevani Nagar Jabalpur. Further allegations were to the effect that the petitioner demanded Rs.50,000/-from one Parasram Uchattar Maha Vidhyalaya Maharajpur for granting recognition and he cancelled the recognition of number of schools as they did not agree to illegitimate demands of the present petitioner and there were also allegations of misappropriation of funds in ICT Project under which the computers were to be purchased for different schools. The said complaint moved by complainant was addressed to the Superintendent of Police, Economic Offences Wing, Jabalpur. The said complaint, dated 02.12.2011 was forwarded to the Deputy Director (Vigilance), Public Instructions, Bhopal who in turn, vide his letter dated 24.12.2011 directed the Joint Director, Public Instructions Division Jabalpur, District-Jabalpur to conduct an inquiry of each issue raised in the complaint and then submit a report.

3. One Shri Santosh Tripathi was holding the post of Joint Director, School Education Department, Jabalpur in the month of March, 2012 who vide his letter dated 15.03.2012 forwarded the said complaint to the present petitioner whereby the petitioner was called upon to submit his explanation as regards the issue raised in the complaint.

4. Pursuant to the letter dated 15.03.2012, the present petitioner submitted his reply on 11.04.2012 and thereafter, the report was prepared by Shri Santosh Tripathi upon receipt of explanation (point wise) submitted by the present petitioner dated 11.04.2012. In the said report he found that none of the charges against the petitioner were proved. The report does not bear any date below signature, but the same contains an endorsement dated 01.10.2012. The said report dated 01.10.2012 was forwarded by the Additional Director, Public Instructions, vide his letter dated 19.11.2012 to the Inspector General of Police, Economic Offices Wing, Vallabh Bhavan, Bhopal and in the light of the said report, the complaint against the petitioner was closed.

5. Now, the aforesaid prosecution projects a new story labeling the report dated 01.10.2012 to be forged, on the basis of which the petitioner was ultimately exonerated and the complaint was closed. However, the second set of the story starts from another report dated 18.01.2013 which is prepared by one Shri K.K. Dwivedi, Joint Director, Public Instructions Jabalpur, who after transfer of Shri Santosh Tripathi, joined as Joint Director, Public Instructions, Jabalpur. The charge-sheet reveals that Shri K.K. Dwivedi then pursuant to the above detailed letter dated 01.03.2012 bearing number 389 issued by Commission