The Rajasthan High Court has dismissed a batch of petitions seeking to quash an FIR related to the use of unfair means in a public examination conducted by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission (RPSC) on October 15, 2022. The court consolidated these petitions due to identical reliefs, inter-related legal and factual issues, and the involvement of co-accused petitioners in the same FIR. The judgment clarifies that its findings will apply to all connected petitions. Given that the FIR predates the new criminal laws, references are made to the erstwhile provisions, with a note that pari materia provisions in new laws should be construed harmoniously.
The petitions, filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) and Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, sought to quash FIR No. 101/2024, registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Ajmer, for offenses including cheating, forgery, and criminal conspiracy under the Indian Penal Code, and violations of the Rajasthan Public Examination (Measures for Prevention of Unfair Means in Recruitment) Act, 2022.
The FIR was lodged by a Senior Deputy Secretary of the RPSC. It stated that Kamla Kumari applied for a Lecturer (Hindi) post in June 2022, claiming to be pursuing post-graduation with pending results. After provisional selection, during document verification, it was discovered she submitted a degree from Mewar University predating her application. Further inquiry confirmed her ineligibility, leading to the FIR. The complaint alleged a large-scale conspiracy involving fabricated educational credentials, which was subsequently assigned to the Special Operations Group (SOG) for investigation.
Petitioners' Arguments:
The petitioners' counsel argued that their names were not in the initial FIR, as no prima facie evidence linked them to the offense. Petitioner-1 was allegedly implicated solely based on an alleged association with a mobile number, without supporting witness statements or documentary evidence. It was also contended that Kamla Kumari's M.A. (Hindi) degree was only issued on December 20, 2022, confirming her ineligibility. The SOG later implicated Dalpat Singh (brother of the accused) for allegedly hiring Petitioner-3 (wife of Petitioner-2) to impersonate Kamla Kumari for a payment of Rs. 10 lakhs. Petitioners 2 and 3 argued that Petitioner-2 was traveling on the day of the alleged incident, making it improbable for him to escort his wife, and that no call detail records substantiated contact between them and Dalpat Singh or Kamla Kumari. They collectively asserted a lack of substantial evidence or witness statements to prove their involvement, emphasizing the potential damage to their young careers.
Respondents' Arguments:
The respondents, assisted by SOG officials, strongly opposed the petitions. They argued that while the petitioners' names were not initially in the FIR, they were included in the charge-sheet after a thorough investigation established demonstrable links to the conspiracy through physical and digital evidence. They highlighted the gravity of the offenses, which involve forgery and impersonation to secure public employment, undermining the integrity of public examinations. They also pointed out that the petitioners had absconded and withheld cooperation, indicating consciousness of guilt.
Court's Findings:
The High Court found no merit in the petitions to quash the FIR. It noted that the allegations prima facie reveal cognizable offenses of public importance, including forgery, impersonation, and conspiracy, which impact the integrity of the public employment system. Quashing such FIRs prematurely would abuse the legal process and prejudice legitimate aspirants.
The court highlighted that the SOG conducted a rigorous investigation, establishing links between the petitioners and the conspiracy, leading to their inclusion in the charge-sheet under due process safeguards. Their alleged abscondence further weakened their case. The SOG's investigation revealed:
- Kamla Kumari's ineligibility due to her academic status at the time of application.
- Consistent contact and a relevant nexus between the accused petitioners and Kamla Kumari, based on call detail records and geo-location data.
- Digital video recordings from the examination center prima facie established Petitioner-3 as the impersonator.
- WhatsApp and telephonic communications indicated Petitioners 2 and 3 acted in concert for monetary gain through impersonation.
- Accused petitioners had internal connections with a university individual who facilitated a fabricated degree certificate for pecuniary benefit.
The court concluded that the petitions failed the "rarest of rare cases" test for quashing FIRs, as established in Bhajan Lal v. State of Haryana, given that the allegations make out cognizable offenses and there is no evidence of mala fide intent. It reiterated that the truthfulness and admissibility of evidence are matters for the trial court.
Consequently, the court dismissed the petitions, directing the petitioners to fully cooperate with the ongoing investigation
BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA, 2023 .
