Orissa High Court
Swagatika Sahani vs State Of Odisha And Another ....... Opp. ... on 5 May, 2025
THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No.2381 of 2024
(In the matter of an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973)
Swagatika Sahani ....... Petitioner
-Versus-
State of Odisha and Another ....... Opp. Parties
For the Petitioner : M/s. Banshidhar Satapathy, S. Satapathy and
B.N. Parida, 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 27.12.2021 passed by the learned J.M.F.C.(Cog. Taking),
Keonjhar in G.R. Case No. 1240 of 2020, whereby cognizance of
offences under Sections 420, 468, 471 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code
has been taken against the petitioner. It is contended that the charge sheet
submitted by the IIC, Harichandanpur 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
Subasini Das, a qualified graduate holding a Bachelor of Science 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.188
dated 31.03.2018 issued by the Collector-cum-Chief Executive Officer,
Zilla Parishad, Keonjhar, and was posted at Jamujodi Nodal U.P School,
Harichandanpur.
While serving in the said capacity, the petitioner was disengaged
from service vide letter No. 2518 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
Page 2 of 12
University, Jhansi was found to be forged. The said disengagement was
based on a communication allegedly received from the University.
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, Harichandanpur, on 07.09.2020 at Harichandanpur Police
Station continues the proceedings. The relevant part of letter of the BEO,
Harichandanpur to the IIC, Harichandanpur Police Station reads as
under:
" I Sri Purna Chandra Amanta, full capacity of power in
Harichandanpur Block Education Office I am to intimate
that one Sasmita Malik, D/O Kuna Malik, JTC
Dhoradiambo UGUP School and one Swagatika Sahani
D/O Ramesh Chandra Sahani have produced fake
certificates during time of engagement as communicated
by DPC, SSA, Samagra Sikshya, Keonjhar vide his letter
No 1855/PED/ Date 27.08.2020. the detailed information of
verification of certificates is given below...."
Based on the said letter, Harichandanpur P.S. Case No. 92/2020 was
registered under Sections 420, 468, 471 and 34 of IPC. After
investigation, the I.O. submitted the Charge Sheet No. 185 dated
23.12.2021 blissfully ignoring the clarification letter issued by the
University. The charge sheet contains the following conclusive remarks.
Page 3 of 12
"Under the above fact and circumstances, as discussed
above and prima facie evidence is well made out
U/S.420/468/471/34 IPC against accused persons namely
(1) Sasmita Mallick (27) D/o Kuna Mallick of Paida, PO-
Siha, Dist-Jajpur (2) Swagatika Sahani (28) C/o Ramesh
Chandra Sahani of vill-Sarat, PO-Chanahatta, Dist-Khurda
A/Pr W/o Manmatha Sahoo of Villl-Jamujodi, PS-
Harichandanpur, Dist-Keonjhar. Hence I Submit CS vide PS
CS NO.185,dt.23.12.21,U/S. 420/468/471/34 IPC against
the above noted accd person to face their trial in the court
of Law."
On bare reading of the conclusive remarks 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 J.M.F.C. (Cog. Taking), Keonjhar passed
the following order taking cognizance of the offences on 27.12.2021:
" The case record is put up today on the received of charge
sheet from IIC, Harichandanpur PS FIR No. 185 dt.
23.12.2021 u/s 420/468/471/34 IPC against the accused
person 1. Swagatika Sahani, W/o- Manmatha Sahoo, Vill.
Jamujodi, PS. H. Pur 2. Sasmita Malik, D/o- Kuna Mallick
of Vill. Paida, PS- Byree, Dist.- Jajpur along with CDS,
statement of witness recorded u/s 161 CrPC and other
relevant documents.
Perused the case record i.e. FIR, CD, statement of
witnesses recorded u/s 161 CrPC and other material
available in this case. There is primafacie material to
proceed in this case u/s 420/468/471/34 IPC, Hence
cognizance of offence punishable u/s 420/468/471/34 IPC
is taken. The accused person is not arrested as per
provision of 41 (A) CrPC notice. Hand over the case
record to G/C. "
Page 4 of 12
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
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
Page 5 of 12
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,
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. B.Ed 2014 213695 PASS CORRECT &
SAHANI 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."
Page 6 of 12
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
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.35864 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:
Page 7 of 12
"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-6 and 7 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."
Following this order the petitioner was reinstated in service by an
Office Order of the District Project Office, Samagra Sikshya (SS) &
Right to Education (RTE) Keonjhar vide Letter No 422 dated
08.02.2023, which is reproduced for ready reference:
"OFFICE ORDER
The Hon'ble High Court of Odisha in IA No.16653 of 2021
arising out of W.P.C No.35864 of 2021 passed an interim
order directing stay operation of the order of
disengagement of the petitioner Swagatika Sahani issued
vide this office Letter No-2518/PED(SSRC) dt.03.092021 in
obedience to the interim order Dtd.11.01.2022 passed in IA
No.16653 and keeping in view the order Dtd.15.11.2022
passed in Contempt No-6693 of 2022 Swagatika Sahani
Sikshya Sahayak(JTC) is hereby taken back to his/her
previous engagement as Sikshya Sahayak (JTC) subject to
final outcome of W.P.C No.35864 of 2021.
On being taken back to his/her previous engagement
Swagatika Sahani is required to furnish an under taking in
shape of affidavit to the effect that he/she will abide by the
final decision of the Hon;ble High Court in W.P.C. No-
35864 of 2021 and also he/she will abide by all terms and
conditions of her contractual engagement as mentioned in
the Resolution No-25605/SME Dtd-26.12.2016 of Govt.in S
Page 8 of 12
& ME Deptt, Odisha and such other instructions received
from the Govt./OSEPA form time to time.
On being furnished of such undertaking the Block
Education Officer, Harichandanpur shall allow Swagatika
Sahani to Join as JTC/JT at Jamujodi Nodal UPS.
By the order of Collector-cum-CEO,
Zilla Parishad, Keonjhar"
However, even after reinstatement in service the criminal
proceeding against the petitioner still continues till date. No doubt the
Writ Petition is still pending; the outcome of the same shall have bearing
on the fate of the petitioner, regarding her service. 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
1
1992 SCC (Cri) 426
Page 9 of 12
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 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
Page 10 of 12
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.
(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
2
(2023) 15 SCC 488
Page 11 of 12
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.
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.1240 of 2020, arising out of Harichandanpur
P.S. Case No.92 of 2020, including the order dated 27.12.2021 regarding
taking cognizance by the learned J.M.F.C. (Cog. Taking), 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
