Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
N. Uma, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 5 March, 2020
Author: Cheekati Manavendranath Roy
Bench: Cheekati Manavendranath Roy
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY
CRIMINAL PETITION No.1104 OF 2020
ORDER:-
This petition is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of her arrest.
2. The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.22 of 2020 of RIMS Police Station, Kadapa.
3. The alleged offences against her are under Sections 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short "I.P.C.").
4. Briefly stated, it is the case of the prosecution that the petitioner did her BDS course in Government Dental College, Kadapa. After passing through the said examination and completing the said course, she has to applied for internship for 365 days and obtained a certificate to that effect. In fact, the petitioner did not complete the internship. However, she has produced a certificate said to have been issued by the authorities of the said College stating that she has completed the internship and produced the same before the NTR University on the basis of which she secured a seat in Narayana Dental College, Nellore in MDS (oral pathology). The Director of Government Dental College and Hospital, Kadapa lodged a report with the police stating that the petitioner has tampered with the said internship certificate and the same was not issued by the concerned authority of the College. Therefore, the police registered the above crime against her for the offences punishable under Sections 468 and 471 of I.P.C. 2
5. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor.
6. Learned counsel for petitioner would submit that the petitioner did not forge the signature of the competent authority on the said certificate and the authorities of the college issued the said certificate to her and she has produced the same before the concerned authority. Therefore, she did not commit any offence of forging the signature of the competent authority on the said certificate and she did not commit any offences punishable under Sections 468 and 471 of I.P.C. and it is the Director of the said college, who has forged the said signature and issued a false certificate if at all it is a false certificate and the petitioner is innocent and thereby prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the criminal petition. He would submit that the petitioner did not at all attend the internship classes and she has filed the certificate before the University showing that she has completed the said internship and the said certificate is a forged and fabricated document. Therefore, having regard to the gravity of the offence and the seriousness of the accusation made against the petitioner, he would submit that it is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail and thereby prayed for dismissal of the petition.
8. Perused the record.
9. In the explanation dated 08-07-2019 given by the petitioner to the Vice Chancellor of the Dr.NTR University, she herself has categorically admitted that due to health problems, she could not attend certain departments, during the period of 3 internship. Therefore, on her own admission, it is now clear that she did not complete the internship as she did not attend the department during the said period. However, she has produced the certificate before the University as if the concerned authority of the college issued a certificate showing that she has completed the said internship. Therefore, knowing fully well that she did not complete the internship, she has produced the certificate stating that she has completed the internship. So, it is evident that the said certificate produced by her, is a fabricated one. So, in the said facts and circumstances of the case, the accusation made against her is prima facie well founded. So, having regard to the gravity of the offence and in view of the seriousness of the allegations made and the accusation made against her, this Court is of the considered view that it is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, as it is a case where, she has obtained a seat by producing a false internship certificate.
10. Therefore, this Criminal Petition is dismissed.
However, as the offences, for which the which the F.I.R. is registered, are punishable with less than seven years period of imprisonment, the Investigation Officer is directed to follow the guidelines prescribed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar and another1 case and also the procedure contemplated under Section 41-A Cr.P.C.
____________________________________________ JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY Date : 05-03-2020 ARR 1 (2014) 8 SCC 273 4 5 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY CRIMINAL PETITION No.1104 OF 2020 Date : 05-03-2020 ARR