Jaidev Singla v. State Of Haryana

In The High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana At Chandigarh Date of Decision:- 01.9.2022 Jaidev Singla ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL Present:- Mr. Gopal Soni, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Rajiv Sidhu, DAG, Haryana.

***** GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J . (Oral) 1.

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking grant of regular bail in respect of a case registered against him vide FIR No. 329 dated 13.11.2020 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC (Sections 120-B, 201 and 472 IPC added lateron) at Police Station Bhiwani Civil Lines, District Bhiwani.

2.

The FIR was lodged at the instance of Secretary, Haryana School Education Board, Bhiwani with the broad allegation that 15 persons had applied for change of date of birth on the basis of decrees of the Civil Court. It is alleged that when the Education Board sought

- 2 - verification of the decrees from the Court of District Judge, Panipat, it transpired that all the said decrees were forged documents and that no such decrees had ever been passed by the competent Court. 3.

During the course of an inquiry conducted by the Additional District Judge as regards the authenticity of the said decrees, it was found that the Judge whose name was mentioned on the decrees in question was never posted in the year 2019 when the said decrees were purported to have been passed.

4.

During the course of investigation some students whose Date of Birth had been changed in a dubious manner were apprehended by the police and one of them namely Govind disclosed that an amount of Rs.25,000/- had been passed on to Parmanand through one Saurav, both of whom were also students. Further upon arrest of Parmanant, it surfaced that it is the petitioner who used to get the Date of Birth entry changed in the record of Haryana School Education Board in respect of various students on the basis of forged and fabricated Court decrees which he himself used to forge with the help of computer. It further surfaced that it is the petitioner who himself used to apply for making changes in record to Haryana School Education Board by even forging the signatures of the students on the application forms and other documents and in several cases even the correspondence address of the students was mentioned as the coaching centre which he himself was running. 5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that there is no evidence worth credence to connect the petitioner with the alleged

- 3 - forgery of certificates or of decrees and that although during the course of investigation the police had taken into possession his computer which had been sent to FSL for examination, but as per the report of FSL no definite opinion has been expressed to show that it is the said computer which had been used to forge and fabricate the decrees. It has further been submitted that other than seizure of computer, the police is mainly banking upon disclosure statements of co-accused which would hardly carry any evidentiary value. 6.

Opposing the petition, learned State counsel has submitted that the petitioner is infact the kingpin of the entire scam and that entries as regards the Date of Birth had been got changed in as many as 187 certificates on the basis of forged and fabricated decrees. It has further been submitted that the very fact that it is the address of coaching centre of the petitioner which is mentioned on several of the applications for change of entry regarding Date of Birth in the matriculation certificate goes a long way to show and establish the complicity of the petitioner. Learned State counsel has however, informed that the petitioner as on date has been behind bars for the last about 1 year and 5 months and is not involved in any other case. 7.

I have considered rival submissions addressed before this Court. 8.

Without commenting anything as regards the merits of the case, but while noticing that the petitioner has been behind bars for a substantial period of 1 year and 5 months and otherwise has a clean record, the petition is accepted and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction

- 4 - of learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned.

01.9.2022 ( GURVINDER SINGH GILL) mohan JUDGE Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No