A Delhi Court recently granted bail to a man accused of enrolling himself as an advocate on forged documents. He was arrested on October 13 on a complaint made by one Jai Prakash Gupta.
The court directed to send the order copy to the Bar Council of Delhi (BCD) for taking action.
Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Amitabh Rawat granted bail to Sumit Sharma on furnishing a bond of Rs 25,000 alongwith two sureties of the same amount.
"The accused Sumit Sharma has been in custody since October 13 and considering the fact that the evidence is documentary in nature and in the overall facts and circumstances of the case, I allow the present bail application of the applicant/accused. Accordingly, accused Sumit Sharma is admitted on bail on furnishing of his personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000 with two local sureties in the like amount," the court ordered on November 22.
The court imposed some conditions on Sharma, one of which was that he shall neither leave the jurisdiction of NCT of Delhi without prior permission of the court nor shall he indulge in any kind of criminal activity.
The court also made clear that the violation of any terms and conditions of this bail order by the accused will entitle the IO to move the Court for cancellation of the bail.
The court observed, "For this limited purpose of bail, it appears that the accused did enrollhimself with the Bar Council of Delhi even prior to the result for his LLB examination was announced, based upon mark sheet, not issued at the relevant time. Thus, the police cannot be blamed for performing their duty."
"Considering the fact that it appears that the accused is a practising lawyer and the allegations of having secured the enrollment with Bar Council of Delhi with some fake certificate is the question and prima facie established, a copy of this order be sent to Bar Council of Delhi forconducting inquiry and action at their end," the court directed.
The court rejected allegations against police officers, in particular, the investigating officer (IO) and deputy commissioner of police (DCP) concerned that they framed the accused in this case.
"This contention appears to be totally incorrect considering the investigation done so far and various materials that have been borne out from the investigation," the court said.
It noted that Sharma was a practising lawyer after having enrolled himself with the Bar Council of Delhi on the basis of forged certificates issued from Ambedkar University, Agra.
The accused is stated to have forged provisional certificates as also the mark sheets issued from Dr Bhim Rao Ambedkar University, Agra, the court noted.
An investigation in this regard is being done. It was found that the accused had enrolled himself with the Bar Council of Delhi on July 28, 2014, even though the mark sheet of his LLB was declared in 2015. The originals have not been found so far.
"Curiously, the complaint has not emanated from BCD, which should feel agitated if it is wrongdoing by any person in securing enrollment with the Bar Council of Delhi," the court observed.
The court noted that so far, in the investigation, no statement of any person has been recorded, who has been cheated by the accused by misrepresenting himself as an advocate.
It was submitted by the accused's counsel that he had been falsely implicated by officers of Anand Vihar police station at the behest of DCP (Shahdara). He was arrested on October 11 and is in custody since then.
It was also argued that the complainant in the case, Jai Prakash Gupta, has a civil dispute with the accused which is pending before the court.
The accused has also made several complaints against the complainant regarding his dispossession from the said suit property and misbehaviour and the complainant, thereafter, to put pressure on the accused filed a complaint against the accused.
An inquiry was conducted by the police officials of Anand Vihar police stations and the university replied to the same by way of a written reply on October 15, 2016, providing the details of the accused regarding marks obtained and status of his LLB. The Bar Council of Delhi has also made a thorough inquiry, the counsel argued.
The chairman of Dr Bhim Rao Ambedkar University, Agra stated that the accused has passed LLB from the university, securing a second division, the counsel added.
However, the additional public prosecutor and counsel for the complainant opposed the bail plea, stating that the accused committed the offence and there is no involvement of DCP in this case.
The accused cheated by enrolling himself with the Bar Council of Delhi using a forged certificate, the prosecution alleged, adding that he was enrolled with the Bar Council of Delhi in 2014, even before he cleared the examination in 2015.
The offence under Section 467 IPC is also established, it argued.
It was further argued that the present case was registered on October 11 against the accused on the allegations and brief that he forged the mark sheet of the 2nd and 3rd years of LLB and the provisional certificate. On the basis of forged marksheet and provisional certificate, he also got himself enrolled as an advocate from BCD and entered into the profession of Advocacy, the prosecution claimed.
The prosecution futher argued that as per the report from the university, the provisional certificate used by the accused at the time of getting enrolled as an advocate was not issued by the university and as per the report of the varsity officials, no serial number is ever given to any of the students as mentioned on the forged provisional certificate. (ANI)