2025:UHC:679 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS C528 No.416 of 2024 Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. Mr. Anil Anthwal, Advocate for the applicant. 2. Mr. B.C. Joshi, A.G.A. with Ms. S.B. Dobhal, B.H. for the State. 3. By means of the present C528 application, the applicant has put to challenge the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.26 of 2024, State Vs. Laxman Singh Rauthan pertaining to Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC, pending before the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ukhimath, District Rudraprayag which emanate out of Case Crime No.4 of 2021 lodged before the Revenue Police Bhiri, Tehsil Basukedar, District Rudraprayag. 4. Facts in a nutshell are that the applicant allegedly secured appointment in the Education Department of the State on the basis of a forged B.Ed Certificate, which he obtained from Chaudhary Charan Singh University, Meerut. After 14 years the documents of applicant were verified by the special investigating team constituted by the State Government for that purpose, wherein the degree of the applicant was found to be forged. 5. It is case of the applicant that after verification services of the applicants were terminated on 01.12.2021; the applicant never concealed any fact regarding the documents submitted by him; the Investigating Officer without there being any evidence regarding involvement of applicant, submitted charge sheet against him; the court concerned did not properly peruse the facts of the case and in a cursory manner it proceeded to summon the applicant to face the trial. 6. On the other hand, learned State counsel argued that it is a matter in which the applicant secured the appointment on the basis of forged degree. Moreover this fact could be revealed 2025:UHC:679 after 14 years of the appointment secured by the applicant, which could be done only at the instance of constitution of a special investigation team by the State Government. 7. Having regard to the facts of the case, this Court is of the opinion that it cannot be ascertained in proceedings under Section C528 of the BNSS, 2023 whether the document submitted by the applicant at the time of procuring appointment was forged or not. It can only be done by adducing required evidence before the concerned trial court. 8. That being the situation there is hardly any scope of interference. 9. Accordingly C528 application lacks merit and is dismissed at the threshold itself. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 10.02.2025 SK