Court No. - 47
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 25918 of 2019 Petitioner :- Pawan Kumar Srivastava And 13 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Kalyan Sundram Srivastava,H.N.Singh(Senior Advocate) Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
AND Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 25971 of 2019 Petitioner :- Dr. Sarita And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shivendu Ojha, ,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv) Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
AND Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 25972 of 2019 Petitioner :- Anshika Yadav And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Santosh Kumar Upadhyay,Vinod Kumar Upadhyay Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J. Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.
As these three petitions seek quashing of common first information report dated 10.12.2019 registered as Case Crime No.1082 of 2019 at P.S. Colonelganj, District Prayagraj, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, they are being decided by a common order, with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.
We have heard Sri H.N. Singh, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Sri Kalyan Sundram Srivastava, for the petitioners in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.25918 of 2019; Sri R.K. Ojha, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Sri Shivendu Ojha, for the petitioners in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.25971 of 2019; and Sri V.K. Upadhyay for the petitioners in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.25972 of 2019; learned A.G.A. for the State- respondents in all the three petitions; and have perused the record.
Before dealing with the prosecution case taken in the impugned FIR, it would be apposite for us to note, in brief, the facts that led to the lodging of the impugned first information report.
A recruitment examination of Assistant Teacher was held in the year 2018. A select list was prepared on the basis of the marks obtained in the recruitment examination. Thereafter, a re- evaluation exercise was conducted and certain candidates, who were found selected, were put out of the select list. When such candidates were put out of select list, one of the candidates filed Writ-A No.15229 of 2019 in this Court. The Court directed for production of the original records. Upon perusal of 14 answer books as well as tabulation chart, annexed with the letter dated 01.08.2019, the Court was anguished to note that the tabulation chart had different marks than what was awarded in the answer books. The Court, accordingly, in its order dated 16.11.2019, passed in Writ-A No.15229 of 2019, directed as follows:-
"After perusing the 14 answer books, tabulation chart as well as chart annexed along with letter dated 01.08.2019, it is very much clear that fraud was played at very large scale and it is a fit case to lodge FIR, therefore, Examination Regulatory Authority, Prayagraj is directed to lodge FIR in this matter."
Pursuant to the above direction, the impugned first information report has been lodged against as many as 87 persons out of which, 49 are the candidates who had appeared in the examination and 38 are the teachers who had evaluated the answer books.
In these three petitions, the evaluers/teachers who had evaluated the answer scripts, are before the Court.
The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that although there may have been mistake in so far as the preparation of tabulation chart is concerned but that mistake cannot be attributed to an ill motive or a dishonest intention for the following reasons:-
(a) The examiners/evaluers are not aware as to whose answer script is under evaluation before them, therefore, there is zero possibility of they coming in contact with the candidate resulting in passing of improper consideration; (b) the evaluation exercise is carried out within the four walls of Centralized Evaluation Centre which is cut off from the public and is heavily guarded; and (c) that the Evaluation Centre is also under CCTV surveillance and therefore any underhand dealing or manipulation is not possible.
In addition to what has been submitted above, Sri H.N. Singh, by citing chart, appended as Annexure No.21 to the petition, has pointed out that the mistake qua the number of copies evaluated by the evaluer is much lower than the permissible level of mistake and, therefore, such a mistake cannot be treated as deliberate. Rather, it would pass of as a human error.
Be that as it may, whether there had been a dishonest intention in providing incorrect marks on the tabulation chart or not, is a matter which has to be determined on the basis of material collected during the course of investigation. Moreover, since this Court, in its order dated 16.11.2019, passed in Writ-A No.15229 of 2019, had taken a prima facie view that there had been fraud and, therefore, it is a case where an FIR be lodged, the prayer to quash the first information report cannot be accepted because the court cannot quash the investigation once allegation is in respect of large scale fraud.
However, considering the facts of the case, keeping in mind that the petitioners before the Court are teachers who were required to evaluate the answer scripts, and also keeping in mind that there is a remote possibility of such teachers coming in contact with the candidates, we deem it appropriate to dispose off these three petitions by providing that the investigation of the case shall continue and brought to its logical conclusion but the petitioners of these three petitions shall not be arrested in the aforesaid case till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., provided they co-operate in the investigation.
All these three petitions, stand disposed off.
Order Date :- 20.12.2019 AKShukla/-