Suraj v. Ut Of Chandigarh

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH

Sr. No.: 103+104 Date of Decision: September 17, 2025 1.

Criminal Miscellaneous No.M-49154 of 2025 Vijay Kumar ..... PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

State of U.T. Chandigarh ..... RESPONDENT(S) 2.

Criminal Miscellaneous No.M-49669 of 2025 Suraj ..... PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

State of U.T. Chandigarh ..... RESPONDENT(S) 3.

Criminal Miscellaneous No.M-49674 of 2025 Arjun ..... PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

State of U.T. Chandigarh ..... RESPONDENT(S) 4.

Criminal Miscellaneous No.M-49675 of 2025 Devender Mor ..... PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

State of U.T. Chandigarh ..... RESPONDENT(S) 5.

Criminal Miscellaneous No.M-49689 of 2025 Nishu ..... PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

State of U.T. Chandigarh ..... RESPONDENT(S)

CRM-M-49154-2025 [2] 6.

Criminal Miscellaneous No.M-49730 of 2025 Parveen ..... PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

State of U.T. Chandigarh ..... RESPONDENT(S)

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHAS MEHLA PRESENT: - Mr. Manvender Chauhan, Advocate with Mr. Mohit Kakkar and Mr. Yadvinder Pal Markan, Advocates, for the petitioner(s).

Ms. Manisha Bansal, Public Prosecutor, with Mr. Ganesh Sharma, APP for respondent-U.T. Chandigarh.

SUBHAS MEHLA, J This order shall dispose of aforementioned petitions as arise out of same FIR and involve similar facts and questions of law. For reference, facts are being taken from CRM-M-49154-2025.

2.

Through the present petitions, petitioners seek anticipatory bail in FIR No.55 dated 25.06.2025 under Sections 420, 511, 465, 468 and 471 IPC registered at Police Station North, District Chandigarh. 3.

As per the prosecution version, petitioners applied for SSCCGL Examination, 2024 under the category of Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPwD) and submitted requisite Disability Certificates in support of their claim. Upon verification, the certificates, purportedly issued by the office of CMO cum Civil Surgeon, Jind (Haryana) and Fatehpur (Uttar Pradesh), were found to be forged. Rather none of the petitioners was resident of the districts from which the certificates were issued. A debarment order dated 28.01.2025 under clause 18 of the Notice of Examination was issued to the petitioners, vide which they were debarred for a period of three years.

CRM-M-49154-2025 [3] Petitioners filed a quashing petition before this Court beearing CWP-57002025, wherein vide order dated 11.03.2025, State Vigilance Bureau, Haryana was directed to conduct an inquiry regarding issuance of certificates and to submit reports within three months. Superintendent of Police, Chandigarh was also directed to take appropriate steps in accordance with Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. Consequent to thereof on basis of enquiring the documents submitted by the petitioners found forged and present FIR was registered. Now the petitioners are required for investigation. Apprehending their arrest, they moved application under Section 482 BNSS before Additional Sessions Judge, Chandigarh which was dismissed vide order dated 29.08.2025. Hence they approached this Court. 4.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that petitioners have been falsely implicated and no offence has been committed by them. The present case is based upon documentary evidence. Nothing is to be recovered from the possession of petitioners. They are ready to abide by all the terms & conditions to be imposed by this Court. Further, co-accused Sahil has already been granted concession of interim bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 07.08.2025 passed in SLP (Crl.) No.11461 of 2025. Learned counsel contended that no useful purpose will be served by keeping the petitioners in custody.

5.

Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the prayer made in the petition while submitting that petitioners are guilty of a crime of forgery and they got prepared fake disability certificates in connivance with co-accused which is yet to ascertain. To unearth the entire chain, custodial interrogation of the petitioner(s) is necessary. In case they are released on bail,

CRM-M-49154-2025 [4] it would give a wrong signal to wrong doer, as they tried to infringe the right of specially abled class.

6.

Heard.

7.

Status report filed in Court by way of affidavit of Uday Pal Singh, DSP, Sub Division Central, U.T., Chandigarh, is taken on record. Status report reveals that on verification, disability certificates from the offices of CMO, Jind, Panchkula, Hisar (Haryana) and Fatehpur (U.P.), Patna (Bihar) and Dr. Baba Saheb Ambedkar Hospital, Rohini, New Delhi, out of 18 candidates, only four had valid disability certificates. The remaining candidates including the petitioners herein, were found to be in possession of forged documents. A detailed report was prepared and on approval of senior officers, the present FIR was registered and investigation were set into motion. 8.

On the ground of parity with co-accused Sahil, status report reveals that even though he has been granted the concession of ad-interim protection, he is not cooperating with the investigating agency. This fact was brought to the knowledge of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and vacation of interim protection granted to him has been prayed by the prosecution. 9.

The State has formulated policies to facilitate persons with disabilities in living a dignified life. The petitioner by forgery made attempt to frustrate the intention of Legislature, which enacted statutes like Right of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 and Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995. Certain seats were reserved for persons with disabilities in the said examination. Allegations against the petitioners are serious that they have forged disability

CRM-M-49154-2025 [5] certificates to get Government jobs by defeating the rights of genuine/meritorious disabled candidates.

10.

In view of the above discussion, the custodial interrogation of the petitioners are essential to ascertain the source from where the forged certificates were obtained; to identify the persons/agents who facilitated their procurement; and to uncover the possible role of an organized gang/network engaged in supplying such forged certificates to candidates. 11.

For the foregoing reasons, this Court does not find any ground to entertain the petitions for granting the concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

12.

Dismissed.

13.

Photocopy of this order be placed on the connected files. (SUBHAS MEHLA) JUDGE September 17, 2025 avin Whether Speaking/ Reasoned:

Yes/ No Whether Reportable:

Yes/ No