Srinagar, Aug 29: Justice Sanjay Dhar has refused to quash an FIR against an Assistant Professor accused of fraudulently obtaining a Reserved Backward Area (RBA) certificate and using it to secure government employment.
Court dismissed a petition filed by AP challenging FIR No. 9/2025 registered at the Economic Offences Wing, Crime Branch, Srinagar, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of the RPC and Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
According to the FIR applicant was selected as an Assistant Professor in Biochemistry under the RBA category in 2019 on the strength of an RBA certificate issued by the Tehsildar, Handwara, in June 2013.
The investigation found that she had married to a person resident of Handwara, on July 7, 2011, and obtained the RBA certificate about two years later by claiming residence in a backward area of Handwara.
The investigation found that the petitioner had resided in the area for only two years when she applied for the certificate & also found that the certificate had allegedly been issued on the basis of incorrect reports by revenue officials and that the petitioner subsequently produced it before the Jammu and Kashmir Public Service Commission, securing appointment as Assistant Professor in Biochemistry in 2019.
The court said the material collected during the investigation showed that the concerned Patwari, Girdawar, Naib Tehsildar and Tehsildar had allegedly abused their official positions in preparing the documents.
The investigation further found that the file relating to the RBA certificate had gone missing from the Tehsil office & also found that the signatures on the renewed certificate were not those of the concerned Tehsildar and that entries in the dispatch register had been tampered with to show that the renewed certificate had been officially issued.
The High Court observed that while the original 2013 certificate had been issued by the competent authority and the offence of forgery in respect of that document may not ultimately be established, the allegations and material on record prima facie attracted offences relating to cheating and misconduct by public servants.
The court also rejected the petitioner’s challenge to the jurisdiction of the Economic Offences Wing, holding that offences relating to documents fall within the jurisdiction assigned to the EOW under the relevant government notification.
Finding that cognisable offences were prima facie made out and that there was sufficient material in the case diary, Justice Dhar declined to exercise the court’s inherent jurisdiction to quash the FIR and dismissed the petition.
|