Srinagar, August 19, KDC: Holding that a litigant who relies on fraudulent documents to abuse the judicial process cannot be allowed to go scot-free, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has dismissed a writ petition filed by a former State Road Transport Corporation conductor and directed the initiation of criminal prosecution against him for placing a forged medical certificate before the court.
A Bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar directed the Registrar Judicial, Srinagar, to file a formal criminal complaint on behalf of the High Court before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Srinagar, against the petitioner, Bashir Ahmad Ganai, for offences punishable under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).
The petitioner had approached the court challenging an order passed by the J&K State Road Transport Corporation (JKSRTC) on March 20, 2018, which treated his period of absence from October 21, 2011, until his rejoining as dies non.
Ganai had sought directions to treat the intervening period as on duty and release all consequential service benefits, claiming that his prolonged absence from November 1, 2004, to October 20, 2011, was not wilful but occasioned by a severe psychiatric illness.
To substantiate his defense, Ganai produced a medical certificate purportedly issued by the Medical Superintendent of the Government Psychiatric Diseases Hospital, Srinagar, certifying that he was under continuous OPD treatment for General Anxiety Disorder from November 1, 2004, to October 20, 2011.
However, following departmental objections, the High Court ordered a detailed verification by the health authorities.
In a compliance report, the Deputy Director of Health Services and the hospital authorities confirmed that the certificate placed before the court was forged.
While the hospital had issued a certificate in May 2016 confirming treatment, the critical lines asserting continuous OPD treatment from 2004 to 2011 and reference to an appended photograph had been interpolated and the signatures tampered with.
Scrutinizing the records, Justice Dhar observed that the petitioner had manufactured the document with the specific design of explaining away an unauthorized absence spanning nearly seven years.
“While it may be correct that the petitioner has been a patient undergoing treatment with Government Psychiatric Diseases Hospital, Srinagar, but he has produced a forged certificate before this Court with a view to explain his unauthorized absence from 01.11.2004 to 20.10.2011 by incorporating the last two sentences in the certificate annexed as Annexure-D to the writ petition… Once it has been found that the petitioner has produced a forged certificate before this Court, it would not be permissible for this Court to exercise its discretionary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution in favour of petitioner,” the Court observed.
Invoking the Supreme Court precedents, the Bench reiterated the legal maxim that fraud avoids all judicial acts, rendering petitions based on deceit liable to outright dismissal.
The Court further held that producing false evidence before a constitutional court warrants direct penal consequences under statutory criminal law.
“However, while dismissing the writ petition, the petitioner cannot be allowed to go scot-free. There is material on record to prima facie disclose commission of forgery and allied offences. Section 336 of BNS makes an offence of forgery punishable… Similarly, Section 340 of BNS makes the act of using as genuine any document which he knows or has reason to believe to be a forged document, punishable. Both these offences, prima facie, seem to have been committed by the petitioner, as such, he deserves to be prosecuted in accordance with law,” the Bench said.
Noting that Section 215 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) bars cognizance of such offences committed in court proceedings except on a written complaint by the court, the Bench directed the Registrar Judicial, Srinagar, to lodge the formal complaint before the CJM Srinagar for lawful prosecution.
Advocate I. Sofi represented the petitioner, while Advocate Shakir Haqani appeared for the respondent Corporation. (KDC)
