Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 59 (JK)

Showkat Hussain Mir v. State

2003-03-26

B.L.BHAT

body2003
Through the medium of this petition under section 561-A Cr.P.C, the petitioner as sought indulgence of this court for quashing the proceedings including FIR and challan No. 115 and the charge sheet against him for offences under sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 201 R.P.C. It is inter alia maintained in the petition that petitioner has been involved in a false and frivolous and fictitious case which has been registered by police station Pacca Danga, Jammu and after investigation accused has been challenged before the court. That there is absolutely no evidence in the case showing that the petitioner has in any manner forged any certificate or document. That the original degree certificates on the file are the photostat copies which cannot be proved and relied for proving the guilt of the accused. That the challan against the accused is based on the alleged enquiry conducted by the D.I.G Police, Jammu but no record or document of the enquiry has been produced. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and have considered the rival contentions raised by them. 3. In case titled as State of Haryana v. Bajan Lal, AIR 1992 SC 604, wherein the Apex Court has held: "103. We also give a note of caution to the effect that the power of quashing a criminal proceeding should be exercised very sparingly and with circumspection and that too in the rarest of rare cases; that the court will not be justified in embarking upon an enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in the FIR or the complaint and that the extraordinary or inherent powers do not confer any arbitrary jurisdiction on the court to act according to its whim or caprice." 4. Having regard to this law laid down by the Apex Court, let us examine the case of the petitioner. 5. It appears that the chargesheet for offences under sections 467, 468, 471, 201 RPC came to be produced before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jammu who in turn came to commit the case to the court of learned Sessions Judge, Jammu as to the offence under section 467 RPC is exclusively triable by the court of Sessions. The learned Sessions Judge, Jammu came to transfer the case to the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Jammu. The learned Sessions Judge, Jammu came to transfer the case to the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Jammu. The case of the prosecution in words eye view before the trial court is that petitioner/accused Showkat Hussain Mir forged his B.A degree certificate showing to be issued by Ch. Charan Singh University in the year 1990 and also forged his certificate for Adeeb-e-Kamil showing to be issued by Jamia-e-Urdu, Aligarh in the year 1991. That on the basis of said certificates he obtained his appointment as probation Sub-Inspector Police and came to be posted at police Poonch and started his service career and continued as such upto year 2001. Thereafter, pursuant to Order No. 248 of 2001 dated 21.4.2001 issued by D.I.G office, the services of the accused came to be terminated on the ground that said certificates produced by him are forged. During investigation this fact also came to lime light that the accused during the period of his undergoing training in police training school, Udhampur, he managed to obtain his said certificates back against receipt and substituted them by production of their attested true copies by forging the signatures of C.M.O, the attesting officer of these certificates. That the accused destroyed the said forged certificates as a result caused dis-appearance of evidence of the said offence of forgery. It is further, alleged that the accused cheated the Government by obtaining certificates on the strength of the aforesaid certificates prepared by him as a result of which swindled government exchequer of lacs of rupees by receiving his pay as Government Employee. It also appears that during the course of investigation the case for offence under sections 420, 167, 467, 468 and 471 RPC came to be registered pursuant to enquiry report of D.I.G Police Jammu, Kathua Range who in his report has stated that a team alongwith photostat copies produced by Showkat Hussain Mir Pursuant to advertisement notice for recruitment of Sub-Inspector in Police department, wherein he has mentioned that he has passed B.A from Meerut University and Adee-be-Kamil from Aligarh and the Assistant Registrar Exam. Ch. Charan Singh University Meerut vide his letter No. Exam. 10471 dated 15.3.2001 intimated that Mir Showkat Hussain S/o Mir Gh. Ch. Charan Singh University Meerut vide his letter No. Exam. 10471 dated 15.3.2001 intimated that Mir Showkat Hussain S/o Mir Gh. Hussain R/o Village Cholla Dhogri Tehsil Haveli, District Poonch (J&K) State has not passed B.A Part III examination in 1990 with Roll No. A104621 and neither any provisional certificate has been issued by this University in the year 1990 or 1992. The said certificate has never been issued by The Registrar Meerut University vide enrollment No. 8860531. The said marks sheet and provisional certificate seems to be fake and not genuine one. The Registrar, Jamia-e-Urdu, Aligarh vide Letter No. Nil dated 16.3.2001 has also intimated that said Showkat Hussain Mir has also not passed Adeeb-i-Kamil from this institution. The xerox marks sheet of Adeeb-i-Kamil sent bearing Roll No. 210 enrollment No. 8334/J belongs to some other candidate. Thus, the said marks sheet is forged and fake. 6. From the perusal of the photostat copy of the application form dated 10.12.1993, whereby the petitioner/accused filled his form for the post of sub-inspector in Jammu and Kashmir Police discloses his qualification as B.A. from the Meerut University and Adeeb-i-Kamil from Jamia-e-Urdu Aligarh; the photostat copy of the provisional certificate issued by the Meerut University indicating that Mir Showkat Hussain has passed his B.A. final Examination in the year 1990 with Roll No. A104621 enrollment No. M 8860531 as a regular candidate of institute of correspondence course; the photostat copy of the Meerut University issued in favour of Mir Showkat Hussain indicating his marks obtained by him in B.A Part-III Examination; the photostat copy of Adeeb-i-Kamil issued by Jamia Urdue Aligarh; indicating that Mir Showkat Hussain passed his said examination under Roll No. 2120 from Jamia-Urdue Aligarh; The photostat copy of the letter of Assistant Registrar Examination of Ch. Charan Singh University Meerut intimating that Mir Showkat Hussain has not passed B.A Part III examination in the Year 1990 under Roll No. A104621 neither any provisional Certificate to this effect has been issued by the University in the Year 1990 or 1992. The photostat copy of the letter issued by Dy. Registrar (Conf) dated 26.2.2001 of Ch. Charan Singh University Meerut intimating that Mir Showkat Hussain has not passed B.A Part III examination in the Year 1990 under Roll No. A104621 neither any provisional Certificate to this effect has been issued by the University in the Year 1990 or 1992. The photostat copy of the letter issued by Dy. Registrar (Conf) dated 26.2.2001 of Ch. Charan Singh University Meerut intimating that Mir Showkat Hussain Mir has not passed B.A Examination in 1990 under Roll No. A104621 and no marks sheet has been issued by the University in his favour; The photostat copy of the verification report of S. Anwar Saeed, Registrar Jami Urdu Aligarh dated 16.03.2001 intimating that Mir showkat Hussain has not passed Adeeb-i-Kamil examination from the said Jamia-Urdu Aligarh. The photostat copy of order No. 139 of 1995 dated 5.4.1995 that Mir Showkat Hussain has not passed Adeeb-i-Kamil examination from the said Jamia-Urdu Aligarh. The photostat copy of order No. 139 of 1995 dated 5.4.1995 that Mir Showkat Hussain S/o Mir Gh.Hussain came to be selected by the selection board and came to be appointed temporarily as sub-inspector of Police against a clear vacancy in the grade of Rs. 1640-60-2600-EB-2900 plus all other allowances as admissible under rules from time to time placed on the challan file presented against the petitioner before Learned Magistrate presently pending decision before the trial court coupled with the enquiry report made by D.I.G. Police, Jammu and Kathua Range and the photostat copy of the aforeapplication form, letter of appointment, the certificates, letters issued by Assistant Registrar Examination Ch. Charan Singh University Meerut and Jamia-Urdu Institute Aligarh, I find there are reasonable grounds to believe that petitioner/accused has forged his B.A final examination certificate issued by Meerut University and Adeeb-i-Kamil issued by the Jamia Urdu Aligarh, which is a valuable security and used the certificates for the purpose of cheating the Government of Jammu and Kashmir and swindled lacs of government exchequer by receiving it as his salary and used the said certificates as genuine which he knew that they are forged and destroyed them thereby causing disappearance of the evidence against him which constitute an offence under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 201. This being so, the learned trial court has rightly charge sheeted the accused for the said offence by virtue of his order dated 29.05.2002. The argument of Mr. This being so, the learned trial court has rightly charge sheeted the accused for the said offence by virtue of his order dated 29.05.2002. The argument of Mr. Bakshi that the charge sheet framed by the trial court does not indicate the alleged date of commission of the offence. This argument is not sustainable because the courts trying a criminal cases are under law competent to alter or amend the charge in case it finds it necessary. The second argument of Mr. Bakshi that the prosecution has not produced the original appointment order, letters received from the University of Meerut and the Jamia-Millia institute but has produced the aforesaid photostat copies which could not be relied. This argument is raised simply to be rejected on the ground that the accused/petitioner has been charge sheeted on 29.5.2002 wherein the accused has pleaded not guilty and the prosecution was directed to adduce their evidence in the bid to substantiate their case against the petitioner/accused and so far the prosecution has not adduced its evidence, more-over the case of the prosecution is that he has caused disappearance of said certificates. 7. Viewed, thus, the registration of the case under Fir No. 92/2001 of Police Station Pacca Danga and thereafter, filing the final report under section 173 RPC before the trial court and then framing charge against the accused for the offences under sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 201 RPC is strictly in accordance with law and by no stretch of imagination this is abuse of law or that of court. The petition is accordingly, dismissed. The trial court record be returned forthwith together with copy of this order, where the accused shall cause appearance on 4.4.2003.