Orissa High Court
Punyatoya Chakra vs State Of Odisha And Another ....... Opp. ... on 5 May, 2025
THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No.2243 of 2024
(In the matter of an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973)
Punyatoya Chakra ....... Petitioner
-Versus-
State of Odisha and Another ....... Opp. Parties
For the Petitioner : M/s. Banshidhar Satapathy and S. Satapathy
Advocates
For the Opp. Parties: Mr. S.N. Biswal, Additional Standing Counsel
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
Date of Hearing: 08.04.2025 :: Date of Judgment: 05.05.2025
S.S. Mishra, J. The present CRLMC is filed by the petitioner
under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, assailing the
order dated 15.12.2020 passed by the learned S.D.J.M, Keonjhar in G.R.
Case No.1214 of 2020, whereby cognizance of offences under Sections
420, 468, and 471 of the Indian Penal Code has been taken against the
petitioner. It is contended that the charge sheet submitted by the ASI,
Keonjhar Sadar Police Station does not disclose any material sufficient
to justify charges alleged in proceeding against the petitioner.
2. Heard Mr. Banshidhar Satapathy, learned Counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. S.N. Biswal, learned Additional Standing Counsel for
the opposite parties.
3. Prosecution case in brief devoid of unnecessary details is that one
Punyatoya Chakra, a qualified graduate holding a Bachelor of Arts and a
Bachelor of Education (B.Ed.) degree, had applied for the post of Sikhya
Sahayak (Junior Teacher - Contractual). After due verification of her
educational credentials, she was appointed to the post vide Order No.193
dated 31.03.2018 issued by the Collector-cum-Chief Executive Officer,
Zilla Parishad, Keonjhar, and was posted at Anjar U.G.U.P. School,
Banspal.
While serving in the said capacity, the petitioner was disengaged
from service vide letter No. 2526 dated 03.09.2021 issued by the District
Project Coordinator, (SS) Keonjhar, without affording any opportunity
of hearing and without conducting any inquiry, on the ground that the
B.Ed. certificate produced by her, purportedly issued by Bundelkhand
University, Jhansi was found to be forged. The said disengagement was
based on a communication allegedly received from the University.
Page 2 of 12
4. It is submitted that the Bundelkhand University, Jhansi,
subsequently issued letters dated 07.09.2020 and 11.11.2020,
categorically affirming and conveying that the B.Ed. certificate issued by
it was genuine. Despite this, the FIR was lodged by the Block Education
Officer, Banspal, on 04.09.2020 at Keonjhar Sadar PS continues the
proceedings. The relevant part of letter of the BEO, Banspal to the IIC,
Keonjhar Sadar PS reads as under:
"In inviting a kind reference to the subject captioned above
as directed the undersigned, at present working as Block
Education officer, Banspal by name Sri Sanatan Rout S/o of
Late Mayadhar Rout aged about 59 years At- Taruan P.O.-
Taruan P.S Ramachandrapur Dist.- Keonjhar, would like to
bring your kind notice with following facts:-
That, one Smt. Punyotaya Chakra, D/o Chakradhara
Chakra now residing at Kashipur P.O.- Keonjhargarh P.S.-
Town Dist.- Keonjhar, was recruited as Junior Teacher
(Contractual).w.e.f 07.04.2018 F/N at Anjar U.G.U.P.
School under the jurisdiction of BEO Banspal as per the
engagement order vide No. 193/ZP Dt. 31.03.2018 of the
Collector-Cum-CEO, Zilla Parishad, Keonjhar..
That, the District Project Officer, Samagra Sikshya (SS) &
Right to Education (RTE) Keonjhar by virtue of his letter
vide No.1855/PED/27.08.2020 (the copy of which annexed
herewith as ANNEXURE-1 for kind reference) has
instructed to lodge FIR against the Junior Teacher's who
have submitted fake B.Ed. Certificate during the time of
their engagement....."
Based on the said letter, Keonjhar Sadar P.S. Case No.269/2020 was
registered under Sections 420, 468, and 471 of IPC. After investigation,
the I.O. submitted the Charge Sheet No. 01 dated 30.11.2020 blissfully
Page 3 of 12
ignoring the clarification letter issued by the University. The charge
sheet contains the following conclusive remarks.
"ON 04.09.2020 AT 11.40 AM BASING ON THE WRITTEN
REPORT OF THE COMPLT SANATAN ROUT (59), S/O
LT. MAYADHAR ROUT VLL TARUAN, PS
RAMACHANDRAPUR. DIST KEONJHAR. A/P- B.E.O OF
BANSPAL, PS- NAYAKOTE DIST. KEONJHAR IIC SADAR
PS KEONHAR REGISTERED PS CASE NO 269 DT.
04.09.2020 U/S 420/468/471 IPC AND INVESTIGATED
INTO DURING COURSE OF INVESTIGTATION. I
VISITED THE SPOT, EXAMINED THE COMPLT AND
OTHER WITNESSES AND RECORDED THEIR
STATEMENT U/S 161 CRPC WHICH IS ENCLOSED
HEREWITH. I SE3IZED ENGAGEMENT ORDER NO.
193/2 P DT. 31.3.2018, VERIFICATION OF
EDUCATIONAL CERTIFICATE, SALARY SLIP OF
ACCUSED, B.ED EXAMINATION BUNDEL KHAND
UNIVERSITY JHANSI INDIA, PROVISIONAL
CERTIFICATE OF ACCUSED AND JOINING REPORT
OF ACCUSED, SEIZED ONE ORIGINAL LOG BOOK, C.L
REGISTER, TEACHER ATTENDANCE, ANGAGEMENT
CERTIFICATE, JOINING REPORT AND FAKE B.ED
CERTIFICATE AND SEIZED THE ORIGINAL
CERTIFICATE I.E PROVISIONAL CERTIFICATE,
ORIGINAL MARK SHEET, BACHELOR OF EDUCATION
CERTIFICATE AND ORIGINAL BANK OF INDIA PASS
BOOK OF ACCUSED. THE ACCUSED PUNYOTAYA
CHAKRA (38), W/O-PRASANTA JENA OF VILLAGE
KASIPUR, PS-TOWN, DIST-KEONJHAR APPEARED
BEFORE ME AND PRODUCE ON ORDER OF HON'BLE
HIGH COURT, ODISHA, CUTTACK VIDE ABLAPL NO.
10719/2020 IN WHICH THE HON'BLE COURT
DIRECTED THE INVESTIGATION OFFICER NOT TO
ARREST TILL FURTHER ORDER. SUBMITTED DETAIL
REPORT TO SP. KEONJHAR AND RECEIVED ORDER
TO SUBMIT CS U/S 420/468/471 IPC AGAINST THE
ACCUSED PUNYOTAYĄ CHAKRA (38), W/O, PRASANTA
JENA OF VILLAGE KASIPUR, PS- TOWN, DIST-
KEONJHAR IS LIABLE U/S 420/468/471 IN THIS CASE.
HENCE AS PER ORDER OF SP KEONJHAR VIDE DR
NO. 6608/DCRB (Cr) DT. 30.11.2020 I SUBMITTED CS
Page 4 of 12
VIDE PS CS NO 01 DT, 30.11.2020 U/S 420/468/471 IPC
AGAINST ABOVE NOTED ACCUSED TO FACE HER
TRAIL IN THE COURT OF LAW. "
On bare reading of the charge sheet, it can be safely inferred that the
charge sheet is completely ambiguous and the culmination of completely
non application of mind. However, on receipt of the charge sheet, the
learned SDJM, Keonjhar passed the following order taking cognizance
of the offences on 15.12.2020:
" The case record is put up today on receipt of C.S. from
IIC Sadar P.S. vide Sadar P.S. C.S. No. 01, dt. 30.11.20 u/s
420/468/471 IPC against accused Punyotaya Chakara,
W/o-Prasanta Jena of Kasipur, P.S. Town Keonjhar along
with CDs statement recorded u/s 161 CrPC. and other
relevant documents.
Perused the case record in FIR, CDs statement of witnesses
recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.C. and other material available in
this case. There is prima facie material to proceed in this
case u/s 420/468/471 IPC. Hence Cognizance of offence
punishable u/s 420/468/471 IPC is taken. The accused
person was not arrested as in order of Hon'ble High Court
vide ABLAPL No.10719 of 2020. Hand over the case
record to G/C."
Petitioner is aggrieved by the aforementioned order and has assailed the
same in this proceeding.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the entire
proceedings is an abuse of the process of law as the basic premise of the
prosecution regarding the allegation of production of fake B.Ed.
certificate is found to be false and has been contradicted by the issuing
Page 5 of 12
authority itself. The Bundelkhand University, vide its letters dated
07.09.2020 and 11.11.2020, clearly stated that the B.Ed. certificate of
the petitioner is genuine.
It is further submitted that neither the Investigating Officer nor the
court below considered these material documents, and the charge sheet is
mechanically filed without any reference to the university's clarification.
6. It is further urged that the State has neither disputed the
authenticity of the university's letters, nor is there any material to show
that the petitioner has fabricated any certificate and on bare perusal of
the charge sheet, it is evident that it suffers from vagueness and lack of
application of mind, especially in light of the unimpeached documentary
evidence exonerating the petitioner. It would be apt to reproduce the
letters received from Bundelkhand University about the clarification
regarding the certificate in question for ready reference:
"No.BU/COF/2020-9100 Date 07/09/2020
To
The District Project Coordination
RTE-SSA, Keonjhar
Office of the DPC
Samagra Shiksha
Keonjhar 755001
Subject: Letter of modification
Sir,
Page 6 of 12
This is under Ref. to this Office Letter No. BU/COF/2020/2317 dt. 29.07.2020 is
response to your letter letter for Verification of Education Certification Bearing
Letter No. 1440 dt. 20.06.2020.
In this matter, it is informed that some lapse has been revealed in the said
verification since (a) the University along with all its dept. was closed at that point of
time following a lockdown and Containment declared in the city as a result were not
available to the officer on duty (roster), (b) the Verification was made at an haste
through the available (just) later on, after reopening of the Office, the Scrutiny
revealed the lapses & it is felt necessary to recall the Verification Report with this
letter modification for your kind information & record
The result is as follows at actual.
Sl. Name S/O Course Year Roll No Result Remark
No.
1 GOPAL KRUSHNA PANCHANAN B.Ed 2014 078604276 PASS CORRECT &
MOHANTY MOHANTY GENUINE
2 PUNYOTOYA CHAKRADHAR B.Ed 2014 6522960 PASS CORRECT &
CHAKRA CHAKRA GENUINE
3 SUBASINI DAS NAKULCH DAS B.Ed 2013 049678242 PASS CORRECT &
GENUINE
4 SWAGATIKA RAMESH CH. SAHANI B.Ed 2014 213695 PASS CORRECT &
SAHANI GENUINE
5 SUJIT KUMAR GANESH CH. B.Ed 2013 074627687 PASS CORRECT &
MOHANTY MOHANTY GENUINE
6 SUNITA DATTA NISHAKAR DATTA B.Ed 2013 589121704105 PASS CORRECT &
GENUINE
7 ARATRARAN JENA AKRURA JENA B.Ed 2013 8802578 PASS CORRECT &
GENUINE
8 DEBASIS SENAPATI JADUMANI B.Ed 2013 042503125 PASS CORRECT &
SENAPATI GENUINE
Hence, this letter supersedes the previous letter and the University regrets for the
Inconvenience caused to you and or anybody else."
The reading of the letter makes it evidently clear that the
University not only clarifies superseding its previous letter but also
expresses regret for inconvenience. It appears from the record that the
police have acted upon the letter issued by the university previously
which stands superseded by this letter dated 07.09.2020. It also appears
that the Investigating Officer didn't make any endeavour to check the
Page 7 of 12
authenticity of this clarification letter. At the same time existence of this
letter is not doubted at any quarter. Hence, this Court cannot close its
eyes while dealing with the issue in lis to take into consideration the
letter dated 07.09.2020.
In addition to the letter dated 07.09.2020 the University have issued
another letter bearing No. BU/COF/2020/4547 dated 11.11.2020,
requesting to accept the above modification letter.
7. Even after such clarification, the removal from service wounded
the petitioner, so the Petitioner came before this Court in W.P.(C)
No.35870 of 2021 , in which this Court as an interim relief directed
staying the disengagement order. The relevant paragraphs are reproduced
herein below for ready reference:
"8. It is submitted by learned counsel for the Petitioner that
he has been disengaged from service on the ground that he
produced fake B.Ed. Certificate and Mark Sheets at the
time of selection issued by the Bundelkhand University,
Jhansi. However, the said Certificates could not be verified
due to Covid-19 situation. He has further stated that he
filed two letters from the Bundelkhand University under
Annexures-4 and 5 of the writ petition, whereunder the
University has stated that the Certificates issued in favour
of the Petitioner are not fake.
9. In such view of the matter, as an interim measure, it is
directed that the order of disengagement of the Petitioner
dated 03.09.2021 under Annexure-1 shall remain stayed till
the next date."
Page 8 of 12
However, the petitioner could not be reinstated in service, as she
had already resigned. Despite the interim order passed by this Court, the
criminal proceedings against the petitioner have continued to date.
Although the Writ Petition is still pending; but in the absence of any
contrary documents doubting the clarificatory letter dated 07.09.2020
issued by the University the petitioner cannot be subjected to ordeal of
criminal trial.
8. This Court is of the considered view that continuation of the
criminal proceedings against the petitioner despite the unequivocal
certification of genuineness of the alleged fake certificate by the
concerned university amounts to gross abuse of the process of law.
The law is well settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State Of
Haryana and Ors vs Ch. Bhajan Lal and Ors1, that the inherent powers
under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be invoked to prevent abuse of the
process of the court and to secure the ends of justice, and held thus:
"102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the
various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV
and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a
series of decisions relating to the exercise of the
extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent
1
1992 SCC (Cri) 426
Page 9 of 12
powers under Section 482 of the Code which we have
extracted and reproduced above, we give the following
categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such
power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the
process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of
justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any
precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and
inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an
exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power
should be exercised.
(1) Where the allegations made in the first information
report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face
value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie
constitute any offence or make out a case against the
accused.
(2) Where the allegations in the first information report
and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not
disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by
police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except
under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of
Section 155(2) of the Code.
(3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR
or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the
same do not disclose the commission of any offence and
make out a case against the accused.
(4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a
cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable
offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer
without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under
Section 155(2) of the Code.
(5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are
so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which
no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that
there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the
accused.
(6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of
the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under
which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution
and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a
specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act,
providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the
aggrieved party.
Page 10 of 12
(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended
with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously
instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance
on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private
and personal grudge."
Similarly, the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mahmood Ali
v. State of U.P.2 also echoes similar principle in which it was held thus:
"13. In frivolous or vexatious proceedings, the Court
owes a duty to look into many other attending
circumstances emerging from the record of the case over
and above the averments and, if need be, with due care and
circumspection try to read in between the lines. The Court
while exercising its jurisdiction under Section 482CrPC or
Article 226 of the Constitution need not restrict itself only
to the stage of a case but is empowered to take into account
the overall circumstances leading to the
initiation/registration of the case as well as the materials
collected in the course of investigation. Take for instance
the case on hand. Multiple FIRs have been registered over
a period of time. It is in the background of such
circumstances the registration of multiple FIRs assumes
importance, thereby attracting the issue of wreaking
vengeance out of private or personal grudge as alleged."
In the case at hand, the very foundation of the prosecution is
rendered baseless in light of the subsequent clarifications issued by
Bundelkhand University. The action of the Block Education Officer in
lodging the FIR appears to be hasty and uninformed, and the police
investigation, mechanically conducted, ignored crucial exculpatory
evidence.
2
(2023) 15 SCC 488
Page 11 of 12
The cognizance order also reflects non-application of judicial
mind as the learned Magistrate failed to consider the materials
favourable to the accused which were available on record.
9. In view of the above, the criminal proceedings against the
petitioner in G.R. Case No.1214 of 2020, arising out of Keonjhar Sadar
P.S. Case No.269 of 2020, including the order dated 15.12.2020
regarding taking cognizance by the learned SDJM, Keonjhar are hereby
quashed.
10. Accordingly, the CRLMC is allowed.
......................
(S.S. Mishra)
Judge
The High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
The 5th of May, 2025/ Ashok
Signed by: ASHOK KUMAR JAGADEB MOHAPATRA
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 05-May-2025 19:01:11
