Madhya Pradesh High Court
Dashrath Singh Rana vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 23 February, 2026
Author: Milind Ramesh Phadke
Bench: Milind Ramesh Phadke
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:6927
1 MCRC-52961-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE
ON THE 23rd OF FEBRUARY, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 52961 of 2025
DASHRATH SINGH RANA
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Prashant Singh Kaurav - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Brijesh Kumar Tyagi - Public Prosecutor for the State.
ORDER
By invoking inherent powers of this Court, the present petition has
been preferred by petitioners under Section 528 of BNSS/482 of CrPC
seeking quashment of F.I.R. bearing Crime No.05 of 2017 registered at
Police Station Bhitarwar, District Gwalior (M.P.) for the offence
punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC and all
consequential criminal proceedings initiated therefrom.
The present case arises out of a written complaint submitted by the
then Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Bhitarwar, District
Gwalior, State of Madhya Pradesh, vide Letter No.
2016/Jan.P./Shiksha/876 dated 15.11.2016 addressed to the Station
House Officer, Police Station Bhitarwar. In the said complaint it was
alleged that Raju Singh Ghiroulia, Mahendra Singh Rawat, Rajendra
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN KUMAR
Signing time: 2/25/2026
10:53:11 AM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:6927
2 MCRC-52961-2025
Singh Rawat, Brindavan Lal, Dashrath Singh (present petitioner),
Gajendra Singh Gautam, Naresh Modi and Virendra Singh Jatav had
secured appointment on the post of Contract Teacher (Samvida
Shikshak) during the period 2006-2009 by submitting forged D.Ed.
(Diploma in Education) mark-sheets at the time of their selection.
According to the prosecution, upon departmental verification the D.Ed.
marksheets furnished by the aforesaid persons were found to be forged
and fabricated. Consequently, the then Chief Executive Officer passed
separate termination orders dated 12.09.2016 bearing Order Nos. 714,
716, 717, 719, 720, 721, 722 and 723, whereby the services of the said
persons were terminated. On the basis of the contents of the complaint
and the accompanying documents, Police Station Bhitarwar registered a
criminal case for the offence punishable under Section 420 of the Indian
Penal Code and took up the matter for investigation.
The prosecution case is that by using forged D.Ed. marksheets for
securing public employment, the accused persons dishonestly induced
the authorities to appoint them as Contract Teachers, thereby committed
cheating and obtaining wrongful gain for themselves and caused
corresponding wrongful loss to the State.
During investigation, the complaint dated 15.11.2016 and the
termination orders dated 12.09.2016 were treated as the foundational
documents. On completion of investigation, the prosecution proceeded
on the premise that the accused persons had knowingly used forged
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN KUMAR
Signing time: 2/25/2026
10:53:11 AM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:6927
3 MCRC-52961-2025
educational documents to secure appointment in various primary schools
under the jurisdiction of Janpad Panchayat Bhitarwar, and accordingly
laid the charge-sheet.
The aforesaid narration constitutes the prosecution story as
reflected from the FIR and the material collected during investigation,
which is subject matter of challenge in the present petition filed under
Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was
appointed pursuant to an advertisement issued in the year 2005 for the
post of Samvida Shala Shikshak Grade-III (Primary Teacher). As per the
said advertisement, the minimum educational qualification prescribed
was Higher Secondary (12th pass) only. There was no requirement of
D.Ed. qualification either in the advertisement or under the applicable
statutory framework governing such appointments at the relevant time.
It is further submitted that the appointments were governed by the
statutory provisions contained in the Madhya Pradesh Nagariya Nikay
Samvida Shala Shikshak (Employment and Conditions of Contract)
Rules, 2005. A bare perusal of the said Rules clearly demonstrates that
for the post of Samvida Shala Shikshak Grade-III, the prescribed
minimum educational qualification was Higher Secondary Certificate
Examination or equivalent, and D.Ed. was not a mandatory qualification
at the time of initial appointment. Thus, in the absence of any statutory
requirement of D.Ed. qualification in the year 2005-2006, the allegation
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN KUMAR
Signing time: 2/25/2026
10:53:11 AM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:6927
4 MCRC-52961-2025
that the petitioner secured appointment by submitting a forged D.Ed.
marksheet is ex facie misconceived and legally unsustainable.
It is further submitted that the petitioner participated in the
selection process, cleared the Vyapam examination, and was appointed
vide order dated 21.08.2006 to the post of Samvida Shala Shikshak
Varg-III in a Primary School under Janpad Panchayat Bhitarwar. At the
time of his initial appointment in 2006, the petitioner was not even
possessing a D.Ed. qualification. Therefore, there was neither any
requirement nor any occasion for him to submit a D.Ed. marksheet at
that stage. The allegation that he produced a forged D.Ed. marksheet to
secure appointment in 2006 is inherently improbable and contrary to the
governing Rules.
It is further submitted that the prosecution has failed to place on
record any document whatsoever to demonstrate that at the time of
initial appointment in 2006, the petitioner had submitted any forged
document. No such alleged forged marksheet forming the basis of the
FIR has been produced before this Court. There is no seizure memo, no
comparison report, no verification from the issuing authority declaring
the document to be forged, and no expert opinion to substantiate the
allegation of forgery. In the absence of production of the alleged forged
document itself, the entire prosecution case is rendered speculative and
unsustainable.
It is further submitted that during the year 2008-2009, the
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN KUMAR
Signing time: 2/25/2026
10:53:11 AM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:6927
5 MCRC-52961-2025
department directed those teachers, including the petitioner, who did not
possess D.Ed. qualification, to acquire the same from the District
Institute of Education and Training (D.I.E.T.). In compliance with the
said direction, the petitioner duly enrolled in the D.Ed. course and
successfully completed the same in the academic session 2009-2010.
The marksheets and certificate were issued by the competent authority
after completion of the regular course. Subsequently, upon acquiring the
requisite qualification, the petitioner was absorbed and appointed on the
post of Assistant Teacher (Sahayak Adhyapak) vide order dated
03.03.2011. This absorption was made only after verification of all
educational documents by the department. The D.Ed. marksheets were
duly considered and accepted by the authorities at that stage. Therefore,
the question of submission of a forged marksheet does not arise, as the
petitioner was in possession of valid and genuine qualification
documents.
It is further submitted that the entire prosecution case is based on
assumptions and presumptions without any foundational evidence, as
there was/is no material to establish that the petitioner forged any
document, used any forged document knowingly, or dishonestly induced
the department at any stage. The essential ingredients of Sections 467,
468 and 471 IPC, namely, preparation of a false document and its
knowing use as genuine, are completely absent. Similarly, the offence
under Section 420 IPC requires dishonest intention at the inception,
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN KUMAR
Signing time: 2/25/2026
10:53:11 AM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:6927
6 MCRC-52961-2025
which is conspicuously missing in the present case.
It is further submitted that the petitioner’s services were terminated
from time to time on similar allegations; however, such termination
orders were repeatedly quashed by the competent Court and/or appellate
authority. This clearly indicates that the departmental action was taken
without proper inquiry or verification. The impugned FIR has been
registered mechanically on the basis of such arbitrary action, without
independent investigation or application of mind by the police
authorities.
Reliance is placed upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme
Court in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, AIR 1992 SC 604, wherein it
has been held that where the allegations made in the FIR do not prima
facie constitute any offence or where the proceedings are manifestly
attended with mala fide, the High Court may exercise its inherent powers
under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash such
proceedings.
It is further submitted that in the present case, even if the entire
prosecution case is taken at its face value, no offence under Sections 420,
467, 468 or 471 IPC is made out against the petitioner, as there is/was no
forged document proved on record, no dishonest inducement, and no
criminal intent attributable to the petitioner. The continuation of criminal
proceedings would therefore amount to harassment and abuse of the
process of law.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN KUMAR
Signing time: 2/25/2026
10:53:11 AM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:6927
7 MCRC-52961-2025
It is, therefore, prayed that the present petition be allowed and FIR
No. 05/2017 registered at Police Station Bhitarwar, District Gwalior
(M.P.) and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, in so far as
they relate to the present petitioner, be quashed.
Per contra, learned Pubicl Prosecutor for the State opposes the
petition and submits that FIR No. 05/2017 registered at Police Station
Bhitarwar, District Gwalior, discloses commission of cognizable
offences under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code.
It is contended that during departmental scrutiny, the D.Ed. marksheets
relied upon by the petitioner at the time of absorption/continuation in
service were found to be doubtful and not in conformity with the records
of the concerned institution. On the basis of such findings, the competent
authority terminated the services of the petitioner and forwarded the
matter to the police for registration of the case. It is further submitted
t h a t prima facie material has emerged indicating use of forged
educational documents for securing and continuing in public
employment, thereby causing wrongful gain to the petitioner and
corresponding loss to the State exchequer. It is further submitted that the
investigation in the matter is still going on and relevant documents are
being verified from the concerned authorities. It is further contended that
at the stage of exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, this Court is not required to conduct a roving
inquiry into disputed questions of fact or appreciate the evidence in
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN KUMAR
Signing time: 2/25/2026
10:53:11 AM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:6927
8 MCRC-52961-2025
detail. The genuineness and validity of the marksheets and the defence
raised by the petitioner are matters to be examined during investigation
and trial. The allegations made in the FIR and the material collected so
far disclose the essential ingredients of the alleged offences and,
therefore, the present case does not fall within the categories enumerated
by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal
(supra). Hence, the State prays that the petition deserves to be dismissed.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties at length and upon
perusal of the record, this Court finds that the entire prosecution case
proceeds on the allegation that the petitioner had secured appointment by
submitting a forged D.Ed. marksheet. However, the material placed on
record reveals that at the time of initial appointment of the petitioner in
the year 2006 to the post of Samvida Shala Shikshak Grade-III, the
prescribed minimum qualification was Higher Secondary (12th pass) and
there was no statutory requirement of D.Ed. qualification under the
Madhya Pradesh Nagariya Nikay Samvida Shala Shikshak (Employment
and Conditions of Contract) Rules, 2005. Thus, the very foundation of
the allegation that the petitioner secured appointment by submitting a
forged D.Ed. marksheet is found to be factually untenable.
It is further evident that the petitioner acquired the D.Ed.
qualification subsequently in compliance with departmental directions
and was thereafter absorbed as Assistant Teacher in the year 2011 after
verification of his educational documents by the competent authority.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN KUMAR
Signing time: 2/25/2026
10:53:11 AM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:6927
9 MCRC-52961-2025
Significantly, the prosecution has failed to produce any specific forged
document allegedly submitted by the petitioner. There is no material on
record to demonstrate that any marksheet has been declared forged by
the issuing authority or the petitioner had knowledge of any alleged
falsity. The essential ingredients of the offences under Sections 420,
467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code are, therefore, not prima facie
made out.
The inherent improbability of the allegations, coupled with the
absence of foundational evidence regarding forgery or dishonest
intention at the inception, brings the present case squarely within the
principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana
v. Bhajan Lal ( supra), wherein it has been held that criminal proceedings
may be quashed where the allegations do not disclose the commission of
any offence or where the proceedings are manifestly attended with mala
fide and instituted with an ulterior motive.
In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court is of
the considered opinion that continuation of the criminal proceedings
against the petitioner would amount to abuse of the process of law.
Accordingly, the petition filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita is allowed. FIR No. 05/2017 registered at
Police Station Bhitarwar, District Gwalior, State of Madhya Pradesh, for
the offences under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal
Code, and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, in so far as
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN KUMAR
Signing time: 2/25/2026
10:53:11 AM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:6927
10 MCRC-52961-2025
they relate to the present petitioner, stand quashed.
(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
JUDGE
pwn*
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN KUMAR
Signing time: 2/25/2026
10:53:11 AM
