The High Court
Case Details
THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMC No.2243 of 2024 (In the matter of an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) Punyatoya Chakra ……. Petitioner -Versus- State of Odisha and Another ……. Opp. Parties For the Petitioner : M/s. Banshidhar Satapathy and S. Satapathy Advocates For the Opp. Parties: Mr. S.N. Biswal, Additional Standing Counsel CORAM: THE HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA Date of Hearing: 08.04.2025 :: Date of Judgment: 05.05.2025 S.S. Mishra, J. The present CRLMC is filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, assailing the order dated 15.12.2020 passed by the learned S.D.J.M, Keonjhar in G.R. Case No.1214 of 2020, whereby cognizance of offences under Sections 420, 468, and 471 of the Indian Penal Code has been taken against the petitioner. It is contended that the charge sheet submitted by the ASI, Keonjhar Sadar Police Station does not disclose any material sufficient to justify charges alleged in proceeding against the petitioner. 2.
Legal Reasoning
Heard Mr. Banshidhar Satapathy, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.N. Biswal, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the opposite parties. 3. Prosecution case in brief devoid of unnecessary details is that one Punyatoya Chakra, a qualified graduate holding a Bachelor of Arts and a Bachelor of Education (B.Ed.) degree, had applied for the post of Sikhya Sahayak (Junior Teacher – Contractual). After due verification of her educational credentials, she was appointed to the post vide Order No.193 dated 31.03.2018 issued by the Collector-cum-Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Keonjhar, and was posted at Anjar U.G.U.P. School, Banspal. While serving in the said capacity, the petitioner was disengaged from service vide letter No. 2526 dated 03.09.2021 issued by the District Project Coordinator, (SS) Keonjhar, without affording any opportunity of hearing and without conducting any inquiry, on the ground that the B.Ed. certificate produced by her, purportedly issued by Bundelkhand University, Jhansi was found to be forged. The said disengagement was based on a communication allegedly received from the University. Page 2 of 12 4. It is submitted that the Bundelkhand University, Jhansi, subsequently issued letters dated 07.09.2020 and 11.11.2020, categorically affirming and conveying that the B.Ed. certificate issued by it was genuine. Despite this, the FIR was lodged by the Block Education Officer, Banspal, on 04.09.2020 at Keonjhar Sadar PS continues the proceedings. The relevant part of letter of the BEO, Banspal to the IIC, Keonjhar Sadar PS reads as under: "In inviting a kind reference to the subject captioned above as directed the undersigned, at present working as Block Education officer, Banspal by name Sri Sanatan Rout S/o of Late Mayadhar Rout aged about 59 years At- Taruan P.O.- Taruan P.S Ramachandrapur Dist.- Keonjhar, would like to bring your kind notice with following facts:- That, one Smt. Punyotaya Chakra, D/o Chakradhara Chakra now residing at Kashipur P.O.- Keonjhargarh P.S.- Town Dist.- Keonjhar, was recruited as Junior Teacher (Contractual).w.e.f 07.04.2018 F/N at Anjar U.G.U.P. School under the jurisdiction of BEO Banspal as per the engagement order vide No. 193/ZP Dt. 31.03.2018 of the Collector-Cum-CEO, Zilla Parishad, Keonjhar.. That, the District Project Officer, Samagra Sikshya (SS) & Right to Education (RTE) Keonjhar by virtue of his letter vide No.1855/PED/27.08.2020 (the copy of which annexed herewith as ANNEXURE-1 for kind reference) has instructed to lodge FIR against the Junior Teacher's who have submitted fake B.Ed. Certificate during the time of their engagement….." Based on the said letter, Keonjhar Sadar P.S. Case No.269/2020 was registered under Sections 420, 468, and 471 of IPC. After investigation, the I.O. submitted the Charge Sheet No. 01 dated 30.11.2020 blissfully Page 3 of 12 ignoring the clarification letter issued by the University. The charge sheet contains the following conclusive remarks. VLL ROUT INDIA, JHANSI P DT. TARUAN, 31.3.2018, RECORDED INVESTIGTATION. "ON 04.09.2020 AT 11.40 AM BASING ON THE WRITTEN REPORT OF THE COMPLT SANATAN ROUT (59), S/O LT. MAYADHAR PS RAMACHANDRAPUR. DIST KEONJHAR. A/P- B.E.O OF BANSPAL, PS- NAYAKOTE DIST. KEONJHAR IIC SADAR PS KEONHAR REGISTERED PS CASE NO 269 DT. 04.09.2020 U/S 420/468/471 IPC AND INVESTIGATED INTO DURING COURSE OF I VISITED THE SPOT, EXAMINED THE COMPLT AND OTHER WITNESSES THEIR AND STATEMENT U/S 161 CRPC WHICH IS ENCLOSED HEREWITH. I SE3IZED ENGAGEMENT ORDER NO. VERIFICATION OF 193/2 EDUCATIONAL CERTIFICATE, SALARY SLIP OF ACCUSED, B.ED EXAMINATION BUNDEL KHAND PROVISIONAL UNIVERSITY CERTIFICATE OF ACCUSED AND JOINING REPORT OF ACCUSED, SEIZED ONE ORIGINAL LOG BOOK, C.L REGISTER, TEACHER ATTENDANCE, ANGAGEMENT CERTIFICATE, JOINING REPORT AND FAKE B.ED CERTIFICATE THE ORIGINAL AND CERTIFICATE I.E PROVISIONAL CERTIFICATE, ORIGINAL MARK SHEET, BACHELOR OF EDUCATION CERTIFICATE AND ORIGINAL BANK OF INDIA PASS BOOK OF ACCUSED. THE ACCUSED PUNYOTAYA CHAKRA (38), W/O-PRASANTA JENA OF VILLAGE KASIPUR, PS-TOWN, DIST-KEONJHAR APPEARED BEFORE ME AND PRODUCE ON ORDER OF HON'BLE HIGH COURT, ODISHA, CUTTACK VIDE ABLAPL NO. IN WHICH THE HON'BLE COURT 10719/2020 DIRECTED THE INVESTIGATION OFFICER NOT TO ARREST TILL FURTHER ORDER. SUBMITTED DETAIL REPORT TO SP. KEONJHAR AND RECEIVED ORDER TO SUBMIT CS U/S 420/468/471 IPC AGAINST THE ACCUSED PUNYOTAYĄ CHAKRA (38), W/O, PRASANTA JENA OF VILLAGE KASIPUR, PS- TOWN, DIST- KEONJHAR IS LIABLE U/S 420/468/471 IN THIS CASE. HENCE AS PER ORDER OF SP KEONJHAR VIDE DR NO. 6608/DCRB (Cr) DT. 30.11.2020 I SUBMITTED CS SEIZED Page 4 of 12 VIDE PS CS NO 01 DT, 30.11.2020 U/S 420/468/471 IPC AGAINST ABOVE NOTED ACCUSED TO FACE HER TRAIL IN THE COURT OF LAW. " On bare reading of the charge sheet, it can be safely inferred that the charge sheet is completely ambiguous and the culmination of completely non application of mind. However, on receipt of the charge sheet, the learned SDJM, Keonjhar passed the following order taking cognizance of the offences on 15.12.2020: " The case record is put up today on receipt of C.S. from IIC Sadar P.S. vide Sadar P.S. C.S. No. 01, dt. 30.11.20 u/s 420/468/471 IPC against accused Punyotaya Chakara, W/o-Prasanta Jena of Kasipur, P.S. Town Keonjhar along with CDs statement recorded u/s 161 CrPC. and other relevant documents. Perused the case record in FIR, CDs statement of witnesses recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.C. and other material available in this case. There is prima facie material to proceed in this case u/s 420/468/471 IPC. Hence Cognizance of offence punishable u/s 420/468/471 IPC is taken. The accused person was not arrested as in order of Hon'ble High Court vide ABLAPL No.10719 of 2020. Hand over the case record to G/C." Petitioner is aggrieved by the aforementioned order and has assailed the same in this proceeding. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the entire proceedings is an abuse of the process of law as the basic premise of the prosecution regarding the allegation of production of fake B.Ed. certificate is found to be false and has been contradicted by the issuing Page 5 of 12 authority itself. The Bundelkhand University, vide its letters dated 07.09.2020 and 11.11.2020, clearly stated that the B.Ed. certificate of the petitioner is genuine. It is further submitted that neither the Investigating Officer nor the court below considered these material documents, and the charge sheet is mechanically filed without any reference to the university’s clarification. 6. It is further urged that the State has neither disputed the authenticity of the university's letters, nor is there any material to show that the petitioner has fabricated any certificate and on bare perusal of the charge sheet, it is evident that it suffers from vagueness and lack of application of mind, especially in light of the unimpeached documentary evidence exonerating the petitioner. It would be apt to reproduce the letters received from Bundelkhand University about the clarification regarding the certificate in question for ready reference: Date 07/09/2020 “No.BU/COF/2020-9100 To The District Project Coordination RTE-SSA, Keonjhar Office of the DPC Samagra Shiksha Keonjhar 755001 Subject: Letter of modification Sir, Page 6 of 12 This is under Ref. to this Office Letter No. BU/COF/2020/2317 dt. 29.07.2020 is response to your letter letter for Verification of Education Certification Bearing Letter No. 1440 dt. 20.06.2020. In this matter, it is informed that some lapse has been revealed in the said verification since (a) the University along with all its dept. was closed at that point of time following a lockdown and Containment declared in the city as a result were not available to the officer on duty (roster), (b) the Verification was made at an haste through the available (just) later on, after reopening of the Office, the Scrutiny revealed the lapses & it is felt necessary to recall the Verification Report with this letter modification for your kind information & record The result is as follows at actual. Sl. No. 1 078604276 Remark Roll No Course Result Name PASS 2014 B.Ed Year S/O GOPAL KRUSHNA MOHANTY PUNYOTOYA CHAKRA SUBASINI DAS PANCHANAN MOHANTY CHAKRADHAR CHAKRA NAKULCH DAS B.Ed 2014 6522960 PASS CORRECT & B.Ed 2013 049678242 PASS SWAGATIKA SAHANI SUJIT KUMAR MOHANTY SUNITA DATTA RAMESH CH. SAHANI B.Ed 2014 213695 PASS GANESH CH. MOHANTY NISHAKAR DATTA B.Ed 2013 074627687 PASS B.Ed 2013 589121704105 PASS ARATRARAN JENA AKRURA JENA B.Ed 2013 8802578 PASS DEBASIS SENAPATI JADUMANI SENAPATI B.Ed 2013 042503125 PASS CORRECT & GENUINE GENUINE CORRECT & GENUINE CORRECT & GENUINE CORRECT & GENUINE CORRECT & GENUINE CORRECT & GENUINE CORRECT & GENUINE 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Hence, this letter supersedes the previous letter and the University regrets for the Inconvenience caused to you and or anybody else.” The reading of the letter makes it evidently clear that the University not only clarifies superseding its previous letter but also expresses regret for inconvenience. It appears from the record that the police have acted upon the letter issued by the university previously which stands superseded by this letter dated 07.09.2020. It also appears that the Investigating Officer didn’t make any endeavour to check the Page 7 of 12 authenticity of this clarification letter. At the same time existence of this letter is not doubted at any quarter. Hence, this Court cannot close its eyes while dealing with the issue in lis to take into consideration the letter dated 07.09.2020. In addition to the letter dated 07.09.2020 the University have issued another letter bearing No. BU/COF/2020/4547 dated 11.11.2020, requesting to accept the above modification letter. 7. Even after such clarification, the removal from service wounded the petitioner, so the Petitioner came before this Court in W.P.(C) No.35870 of 2021 , in which this Court as an interim relief directed staying the disengagement order. The relevant paragraphs are reproduced herein below for ready reference: “8. It is submitted by learned counsel for the Petitioner that he has been disengaged from service on the ground that he produced fake B.Ed. Certificate and Mark Sheets at the time of selection issued by the Bundelkhand University, Jhansi. However, the said Certificates could not be verified due to Covid-19 situation. He has further stated that he filed two letters from the Bundelkhand University under Annexures-4 and 5 of the writ petition, whereunder the University has stated that the Certificates issued in favour of the Petitioner are not fake. 9. In such view of the matter, as an interim measure, it is directed that the order of disengagement of the Petitioner dated 03.09.2021 under Annexure-1 shall remain stayed till the next date.” Page 8 of 12 However, the petitioner could not be reinstated in service, as she had already resigned. Despite the interim order passed by this Court, the criminal proceedings against the petitioner have continued to date. Although the Writ Petition is still pending; but in the absence of any contrary documents doubting the clarificatory letter dated 07.09.2020 issued by the University the petitioner cannot be subjected to ordeal of criminal trial. 8. This Court is of the considered view that continuation of the criminal proceedings against the petitioner despite the unequivocal certification of genuineness of the alleged fake certificate by the concerned university amounts to gross abuse of the process of law. The law is well settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State Of Haryana and Ors vs Ch. Bhajan Lal and Ors1, that the inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be invoked to prevent abuse of the process of the court and to secure the ends of justice, and held thus: “102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions relating the extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent the exercise of to 1 1992 SCC (Cri) 426 Page 9 of 12 powers under Section 482 of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we give the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised. (1) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused. (2) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code. (3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused. (4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code. (5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. (6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party. Page 10 of 12 (7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.” Similarly, the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Mahmood Ali v. State of U.P.2 also echoes similar principle in which it was held thus: to look “13. In frivolous or vexatious proceedings, the Court owes a duty into many other attending circumstances emerging from the record of the case over and above the averments and, if need be, with due care and circumspection try to read in between the lines. The Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Section 482CrPC or Article 226 of the Constitution need not restrict itself only to the stage of a case but is empowered to take into account the the initiation/registration of the case as well as the materials collected in the course of investigation. Take for instance the case on hand. Multiple FIRs have been registered over a period of time. It is in the background of such circumstances the registration of multiple FIRs assumes importance, thereby attracting the issue of wreaking vengeance out of private or personal grudge as alleged.” circumstances leading overall to In the case at hand, the very foundation of the prosecution is rendered baseless in light of the subsequent clarifications issued by Bundelkhand University. The action of the Block Education Officer in lodging the FIR appears to be hasty and uninformed, and the police investigation, mechanically conducted, ignored crucial exculpatory evidence. 2 (2023) 15 SCC 488 Page 11 of 12 The cognizance order also reflects non-application of judicial mind as the learned Magistrate failed to consider the materials favourable to the accused which were available on record. 9. In view of the above, the criminal proceedings against the petitioner in G.R. Case No.1214 of 2020, arising out of Keonjhar Sadar P.S. Case No.269 of 2020, including the order dated 15.12.2020 regarding taking cognizance by the learned SDJM, Keonjhar are hereby quashed. 10. Accordingly, the CRLMC is allowed. The High Court of Orissa, Cuttack The 5th of May, 2025/ Ashok …………………. (S.S. Mishra) Judge Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: ASHOK KUMAR JAGADEB MOHAPATRA Designation: Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 05-May-2025 19:01:11 Page 12 of 12