The Allahabad High Court has called the consequences of fraud by court staff far-reaching and damaging to the justice system

The Allahabad High Court has said that the consequences of fraud by court staff are far-reaching, detrimental to the justice system and eroding public confidence in the judiciary. When court personnel abuse their authority for personal gain, it compromises the integrity of judicial decisions and raises questions about the legitimacy of judicial proceedings.

The Division Bench of Justice Siddharth and Justice Vinod Diwakar was hearing the petition filed by Suresh Kumar Mishra.

The petitioner has approached the Court through the writ petition seeking to issue a writ, order or direction in the form of a mandamus to quash the FIR dated 27.4.20223 with case under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC, registered with the police, to be destroyed. Robertsganj Station, Sonbhadra District and further not to take any coercive action against the petitioner.

Investigation of the FIR reveals that a written complaint was filed with the SHO, PS Sonbhadra by the petitioner, who was working as a Senior Assistant Registrar in the court of the Chief Judiciary, Sonebhadra. Subsequently, the petitioner became the main accused in the FIR, which inter alia states that a list of 629 cases registered by the ARTO Mirzapur under the Motor Vehicles Act for various offenses was received in the court of the Chief Judge of the Judiciary, Sonebhadra , for conducting the proceedings in accordance with the provision of the Motor Vehicles Act.

As per the directions of the Court, he compared the list of 629 cases with the fine register, ration book and other data of the Court and found that 304 cases had not been dealt with by the Court and the Challan/fine slips were found to be correct. be forged.

Upon further investigation, administrative errors were found in seven cases; in the remaining cases, it was revealed that a forgery had been committed on the original receipt, and it turned out that the amount of the fine had been clandestinely changed/adjusted. In most cases, such counterfeit receipts were issued on public holidays, during the pandemic, when the court was in recess or when the presiding officer was on leave.

After receiving the written complaint from the petitioner, the police registered the disputed FIR and initiated investigation.

The crux of the allegation is that the petitioner, while working as a Senior Assistant in the Court of Chief Judiciary Judge Sonbhadra from October 2020 to March 2023, in consultation with the staff and officers of the ARTO, released 304 vehicles against counterfeit vehicles. revenues and caused huge losses to the public treasury by cheating on the legal proceedings.

The co-accused Prabhat Kumar Sharma, who was working under the supervision of the petitioner, was arrested on 13.12.2023 and his statement has revealed the role of the petitioner. In the account of accused Prabhat Sharma, numerous truck owners and lawyers have deposited a significant amount of Rs 20 lacs through e-banking, phone-pe and googlepe.

It is further revealed that after the money was deposited into his account, it was withdrawn and transferred to the petitioner on the same day. The forged challan slips used to release the vehicle from the ARTO office were used as original and uploaded on the RTO website by the petitioner and his staff in connivance with the staff/employee of the ARTO office.

The Court noted that,

A perusal of the record shows that the petitioner has been acquitted of the allegations leveled by Anil Kumar Singh, practicing Advocate at the District Court of Sonbhadra, on whose complaint the Administrative Judge, District Sonbhadra, directed the District Judge Sonbhadra to initiate proceedings . investigation against the petitioner.

Anil Kumar Singh, learned counsel on 29.3.2023, resigned from his earlier statement dated 29.3.2023 and “did not push” his complaint in his supplementary statement recorded on 27.4.2023.

The law is settled on this point and the Supreme Court has consistently taken the position in a series of decisions that it is beyond dispute that criminal proceedings are different from civil proceedings. In disciplinary matters, it is possible to file charges against a delinquent official on a preponderance of probabilities and consequently terminate his services. But according to our criminal jurisprudence, the same evidence may not be sufficient to deprive him of his liberty. Such a distinction between the standards of proof in civil and criminal proceedings is deliberate, given the differences in stakes, the power differential between the parties and the social costs of an incorrect decision. Thus, in a disciplinary investigation, strict rules of evidence and procedure of a criminal trial do not apply, just as in certain cases statements made before investigating officers may be relied upon.

The Court said that,

We have carefully gone through the entire material placed before us, but we are not convinced that the allegations contained in the disputed FIR and the material collected during the investigation are not bona fide, rendering the entire proceedings illegal. The petitioner is on the run and the police are raiding the petitioner’s possible hideouts. Such large-scale organized fraud cannot be carried out without the active cooperation of the office of the Chief Judge, Shonbhadra.

Since the investigation is still at a premature stage and the role of the petitioner as a key figure in the execution of the crime has been exposed, it is therefore not possible to anticipate the outcome of the investigation and draw a conclusion on the issue of bad ideas about crime. material currently available. Therefore, we cannot find any force in the contentions of the petitioner’s counsel. In addition, there are serious allegations that must be weighed after the evidence has been gathered. It is a well-established provision of law that a criminal investigation, if otherwise justified, shall not be affected as a result of the departmental investigation.

In the light of the material collected by the Investigating Officer as the petitioner, we are not convinced that the investigation is manifestly fraught with malafide and/or that the proceedings have been initiated maliciously with an ulterior motive to take revenge on the petitioner and with intent to thwart him due to personal and private grudges. At this stage, we cannot embark on an in-depth inquiry into the reliability, genuineness or otherwise correctness of the allegations in the FIR and the extraordinary and inherent powers do not confer arbitrary jurisdiction on the Court to act at its whim or whim.

The Court further observed that if we go back to the material placed before us which came to light during the course of investigation, in our considered opinion, the allegations against the petitioner clearly constitute a cognizable offense requiring registration of FIR and justifies research into this. under one of the categories of cases formulated in Bhajan Lal’s case (supra), calling for exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction in the Supreme Court to quash the FIR itself.

Since the petitioner is not cooperating with the investigating officer, the police are conducting raids on his hideouts; there is serious apprehension on the part of the police that the petitioner might tamper with the evidence and influence the witnesses to be aware of the proceedings in the criminal case as he had worked in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate and is currently working/posted is as Central Nazir in Hof district, Sonbhadra; therefore, the Court dismissed the prayer for stay of arrest.

The Court noted that the allegations are prima facie serious and that the potential suspects are resourceful. Therefore, a thorough and unbiased investigation should be conducted without being influenced by external influences for external reasons. The IG Police, Varanasi Zone will oversee the overall investigation and the Superintendent of Police, Sonbhadra, in coordination with DIG Police, Mirzapur Range, will oversee the day-to-day investigation.

The court granted the request with the order to complete the investigation as soon as possible. Furthermore, the Court directed that the IG Police in Varanasi zone shall ensure that the Investigating Officer utilizes all available scientific and forensic assistance in collecting evidence, to the extent permitted under law. If allegations of corruption and criminal breach of trust by a public official come to light during the investigation, all relevant aspects will be thoroughly investigated by the police.