Prayagraj, Feb 11 (PTI) The Allahabad High Court has denied bail to an advocate accused of forging his Class 12 marksheet and getting himself registered with the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh on the basis of the alleged document.
Rejecting the bail application of one Ashish Shukla, Justice Krishan Pahal observed that it is a case of grave fraud on the justice system. An advocate is an officer of the court and when he himself resorts to such illegality, it constitutes a grave and deliberate fraud upon the institution of justice, he said.
“For those upholding the law, their behaviour is more important than their words. An advocate is not merely a professional engaged in litigation; he is a vital pillar in the administration of justice.
“The court cannot afford to show leniency in matters of this nature and any misplaced sympathy would amount to compromising the sanctity and credibility of the legal profession,” the court said.
The applicant, a registered advocate with the Bar Council of UP, approached the high court seeking bail in a case under sections 420 (cheating), 467 (forgery of valuable security), 468 (forgery for the purpose of cheating) and 471 (using as genuine a forged document) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The FIR against the applicant was lodged following a complaint made by an advocate to the president of the Kanpur Bar Association alleging that Shukla had forged his educational credentials to secure his registration. This complaint was later forwarded to the commissioner of police with a recommendation for lodging an FIR.
Shukla claimed to have passed his Intermediate examination in 1994. However, official records from the UP Board showed he had failed in the examination. Despite repeated notices, he could not produce the Class 12 educational certificates before the investigating officer (IO), as he claimed they were missing.
The Kanpur sessions judge cancelled his anticipatory bail in November last year for failing to comply with the conditions including furnishing his complete educational credentials before the investigating officer. In December last year, he was arrested in Nainital where he was on vacation.
The court in its order dated February 6, rejected the applicant’s contention that the termite had “selectively” destroyed the Class 12 certificate. The bench also noted that his stance was contradicted by the report received from the board officials which stated that the applicant failed in the Class 12 examination.
Thus, the bench concluded that the material on record prima facie established that the applicant had failed in the Class 12 examination and yet falsely represented himself as having passed it. PTI COR RAJ KSS KSS
This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.