Acquittal In Criminal Case For Allegedly Submitting Forged Documents Doesn't Confer Eligibility For Service: Rajasthan High Court

The Rajasthan High Court upheld termination of the petitioner on allegations of submitting forged documents during appointment process, despite the petitioner being acquitted in a criminal case of forgery, fabrication and cheating instituted by the concerned department.

Justice Anand Sharma said that just because the petitioner was acquitted, would not give rise to the presumption that such acquittal confers eligibility on the petitioner to hold the concerned post.

"Even otherwise, merely the fact that the petitioners have been acquitted from the charge of forgery, fabrication and cheating, would not give rise to any presumption that such acquittal has conferred the requisite qualification and eligibility upon the petitioners to hold the post of Junior Accountant in the office of the respondents"

The petitioner was appointed as a Junior Accountant in 2007 on a probation basis. After a few years, objection was raised by the State regarding genuineness of the educational qualification certificates submitted by the petitioner at the time of appointment. In relation to this, the petitioner submitted a verification letter from the Magadh University.

The State had also filed a criminal case against the petitioner accusing him of forgery and cheating in relation to those certificates in which he was acquitted. Despite such findings, the petitioner was terminated from service. Hence, petition was filed before the Court.

It was the case of the petitioner that the findings recorded by the criminal courts shall prevail over the assumptions of the State, since the criminal court had better means, skill and jurisdiction to assess the veracity of the documents.

On the contrary, State department argued that not only the qualification certificates, but also the verification letter submitted by the petitioner from the Magadh University was forged. This was revealed when based on the State's query, Magadh University sent a letter affirming that the petitioner never took admission in the University. In this light, his services were terminated.

It was further submitted by the State that in the criminal case, the petitioner was acquitted only by giving the benefit of doubt, and the proceeding conducted were altogether different in nature than the proceedings by the State. Mere acquittal by criminal courts would not, ipso facto, absolve the petitioner from the act of committing forgery and fabrication.

After hearing the contentions, the Court aligned with the arguments put forth by the State and held that,

“…as per the petitioners, acquittal in such criminal case has got significant meaning even for treating the documents for the purpose of assessing eligibility. Such contention is totally irrational, illogical and misconceived, for the reason that the standard of proof in criminal case is altogether different and is based on the fundamental principle that the prosecution has to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt…Verification of qualification is altogether different process.”

Reference was made to the Supreme Court case of Avtar Singh v Union of India & Other in which it was held that even if an employee was acquitted in a criminal case, the acquittal did not confer any vested right for appointment, and such consideration was left open to the employer based on his/her suitability.

The Court also took into account the fact that petitioner's acquittal in the criminal case was based on benefit of doubt, while the State had put in place sufficient documents on what all enquiry was conducted by them to verify the qualification documents, and the letters from the Magadh University made it clear that the petitioner had forged the certificates.

In this light, it was held that such qualification documents could not be said to be valid, or conferring any eligibility on the petitioner to seek or continue his appointment.

Accordingly, the petition was dismissed.

Title: Ashok Kumar & Anr. v Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Raj) 297

Click Here To Read/Download Order