SAYAR NAHAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant Criminal misc petition has been filed against the order dtd. 17/3/2016 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Pali in Revision No. 106/2015 [56/15] affirming the order dtd. 21/2/2015 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Marwar Junction whereby cognizance was taken against the petitioner on negative Final report for offence under Sec. 420, 468, 471, 120B and Sec. 468/109 IPC.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that both the courts below failed to consider that on three occasions, the investigating officer after conducting thorough investigation had given negative Final Report in favour of the petitioner. Even in the FSL report, no opinion was given against the petitioner to prove that the documents were tampered by her. It is argued that the courts below failed to appreciate that the answersheets were checked by the teachers and there was no criminal intention to give higher marks to any student as the petitioner was Head Mistress of the school and countersigned the result sheet. It is also argued that the institution had terminated the services of petitioner, however, upon filing the appeal before the Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institutions Tribunal, Jaipur, the termination order was set aside. It is submitted that the complainant only with malafide intention has implicated the present petitioner and the courts below have taken cognizance against the petitioner merely on presumptions. Moreover, the respondent no.2 complainant has expired and even the institution i.e. Mahaveer Girls Higher Secondary School is also closed and there is no one to pursue the complaint filed by the respondent no.2 complainant. In these circumstances, it is prayed that the misc petition may be allowed and the impugned orders passed by the courts below qua the petitioner may be quashed and set aside.

(3.) Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has produced a report received from the SHO, P.S. Siryari, District Pali enclosing the death certificate of respondent no.2 Shivhare Jain. However, while opposing the prayer made by the petitioner, it is argued that although, no direct involvement of the petitioner is found on the basis of material on record but being a Head Mistress of the institution, petitioner is liable to be prosecuted.