Rajasthan High Court Refuses To Quash FIR Against Three Accused For Forging Degrees & Impersonating In Govt. Exams
The Rajasthan Excessive Courtroom whereas refusing reduction to 3 folks booked for forging levels and finishing up impersonation whereas showing for presidency exams has noticed that the crimes are of considerable public significance.
The Courtroom was contemplating Writ Petition searching for quashing of offences registered for the offences underneath Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of IPC and Sections 3 and 10 of Rajasthan Public Examination (Measures for Prevention of Unfair Means in Recruitment) Act, 2022.
The one-judge bench of Justice Sameer Jain noticed, “….this Courtroom finds that the Petitioners have did not advance any tenable floor for quashing the FIR or charge-sheet. The findings recorded by the Particular Operations Group (SOG), primarily based on documentary proof, forensic scrutiny, digital communications, geo-location information, and visible information, collectively substantiate a prima facie case in opposition to the petitioners, encompassing offences of forgery, impersonation, and prison conspiracy, all of that are of considerable public significance…..”
The Petitioners had been represented by Advocate Punit Jangid whereas the Respondents had been represented by Deputy Authorities Advocate MS Shekhawat.
Details of the Case
The FIR was lodged by Senior Deputy Secretary of the Rajasthan Public Service Fee (RPSC), Ajmer in opposition to people who’re allegedly concerned in a large-scale conspiracy involving fabrication of academic credentials by procuring and distributing cast diploma certificates from Mewar College in an effort to safe illicit advantages.
Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that on the time of registration of the impugned FIR, the names of the petitioners didn’t determine therein, as no proof or materials was out there to prima facie join them with the alleged offence. It was contended that, through the course of investigation, the title of the Petitioner-1 got here to be interpolated into the report solely on the premise of an alleged affiliation with a cell phone quantity purportedly linked to the conspiracy. It was additional submitted that it was alleged that the stated cellular quantity was utilized by Petitioner-1 to orchestrate the fee of the offence in query. Nonetheless, no witness statements, documentary proof, or identification proceedings had been introduced on report to implicate Petitioner-1. The Counsel argued that the purported linkage rests merely on speculative inferences drawn by the Particular Operations Group (SOG).
It was submitted that the Candidate who was named within the FIR was ineligible to be chosen for the publish in query. The Counsel alleged that the the SOG engaged the stated candidate to impersonate as a dummy candidate in consideration of economic gratification of ₹10,00,000/-. It was additional submitted that no witness statements exist to corroborate any of the imputations leveled in opposition to the Petitioners. Reliance was positioned on Supreme Courtroom’s ruling in State of Andhra Pradesh vs. Chekka Guru Murali Mohan & Ors., 2021.
Then again, Counsel for the Respondents, assisted by officers from the SOG submitted that though the Petitioners’ names weren’t initially included within the FIR, they had been integrated within the charge-sheet solely after a strenuous and thorough investigation. It was additional submitted that the SOG submitted a complete factual report, confirming that the current case entails two intertwined prison actions, particularly, the fabrication of academic paperwork and impersonation to safe public employment. The Counsel highlighted that the Petitioners, for a substantial interval, absconded and withheld cooperation, thus evincing consciousness of guilt.
Reasoning By Courtroom
The Courtroom discovered no benefit for interference and quashing of the impugned FIR, because the allegations reveal prima facie cognizable offences underneath Sections 467, 468, 471, and 120-B IPC, pertaining to forgery of academic credentials, impersonation, and conspiracy which implicate the integrity of the general public employment system.
Noting that these are grave offences “of public significance”, it harassed that if the FIRs of such nature if quashed prematurely would lead to abuse of the authorized course of and prejudice professional aspirants.
“Moreover, it’s noteworthy that the investigating agency-SOG performed an arduous investigation, established hyperlinks between accused petitioners and conspiracy, and filed a chargesheet. Despite the fact that petitioners weren’t named within the FIR, their names had been justifiably launched post-investigation, underneath safeguards of due course of. Their alleged abscondence and noncooperation additional detracts from any case of malafide prosecution…” the Courtroom noticed.
It was additionally of the view that it may be inferred that the people named within the charge-sheet had been in constant contact with each other and maintained an inexpensive nexus related to the alleged acts and emphasised that it’s a settled precept of regulation that quo advert judex non lapsus which means that the courtroom intervenes solely the place course of is abused, and never in extraordinary method.
The Petition was accordingly dismissed.
Trigger Title: Babu Lal vs. The State Of Rajasthan (2025:RJ-JP:24406)
Appearances:
Petitioners– Advocate Punit Jangid, Advocate Sahil Rajpurohit, A dvocate Deepak Chauhan
Respondents– Deputy Authorities Advocate MS Shekhawat, Advocate Vinod Sharma,
