JUDGMENT Sureshwar Thakur, J —Through the instant petitions, the petitioners, pray, for quashing of FIR No. 6 of 2010 of 18.4.2010, registered with State Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau, Solan, constituting therein commission of offences punishable under Sections 420, 468, 471, 201 and 120-B of the IPC AND also in both the petitions, further relief(s) , are prayed, of proceedings in consequence thereto, pending, before the learned trial Court concerned, being ordered to be also quashed and set aside, thereupon, both the aforesaid petitions are amenable, for, disposal by a common judgment. 2. Avinash Kumari is the sister of co-accused Naresh Chand. Co-accused Naresh Chand, at the relevant time, was, serving as a driver in the office of BMO, Chandi. Co-accused Avinash Kumari, is, serving as staff nurse in the Health Department of Himachal Pradesh. She is alleged, to, in her original matriculation certificate, to be born, on 14.8.1965. In the apposite abstract of family register also her date of birth is likewise entered as 14.8.1965. However, in the apposite leaf of her service book, an alteration is alleged to occur vis-a-vis her date of birth, (i) comprised in the initially therein scribed apposite words, though, bearing consonance with the original of the matriculation certificate, (ii) yet, thereafter the words "1965", being, purportedly replaced by 1969, (iii) AND thereafter, for precluding detection, of, alterations, of, hitherto illegally altered words "69", theirs being re-scribed as "65". The FSL concerned on receiving the apposite alterations, for its recording an opinion, has, in its report, made an opinion that all the scribings, in the apposite leaf, being, in the handwriting of accused Avinash Kumar. 3. Be that as it may, even if the aforesaid scribings are opined by the FSL concerned, to be, in the handwritings, of, accused/petitioner Avinash Kumari, (i) yet the learned counsel appearing, for, the petitioner, contends that since the date of birth of the petitioner Avinash Kumar, as, recorded in her service book, bears consonance with her date of birth recorded in her matriculation certificate, (ii) thereupon, no wrongful loss would occur to the State exchequer nor any wrongful gain would occur vis-avis petitioner Avinash Kumari. However, the aforesaid submission loses its vigour, (iii) as even in the seniority list prepared by the department concerned, a reflection is borne therein, of the date of birth of the petitioner being recorded therein to be 14.8.1969, (iv) thereupon, it is to be concluded that the petitioner, for, camouflaging hers making untenable alterations in the original leaf, of, her service book, hers rather bringing the unauthorised tamperings or alterations, in consonance with her date of birth occurring in her matriculation certificate. Consequently, hence, hers penally tampering with a valuable security. 4. The upshot of the aforesaid discussion is that prima faice at this stage, it has to be concluded that the petitioners are guilty of the offences, borne in the apposite FIR, (i) especially when co-accused Naresh Chand, her brother, while at the relevant time , serving in the office concerned, whereat the relevant records are kept, hence, prima facie , it appears, of, his conspiring with co-accused Avinash Kumari, for making untenable tamperings besides alterations in the apposite leaf, of, the service book, of Avinash Kumari. In sequel, he is guilty of conspiring with the principal accused, in the commission of offences, alleged in the FIR against them. 5. For the foregoing reasons, there is no merit in the instant petitions and they are dismissed accordingly. All pending applications are also dismissed. No costs. Records be sent back. The parties are directed to appear before the learned trial Court on 26th February, 2018. However, it is made clear that the observations made hereinabove shall have no bearings on the merit of the case.