Bombay High Court Orders Police Officer To Compensate NDA Professor Falsely Prosecuted For Alleged Fake Disability Certificate

The Bombay High Court ordered compensation of Rs. 25,000 to be paid to one Dr. Kamal Chandra Tiwari, an Assistant Professor at the National Defence Academy, Pune falsely prosecuted for producing fake disability certificates.

A division bench of Justice Nitin W Sambre and Justice RN Laddha ordered the compensation to be recovered from the salary of the police officer who filed a chargesheet despite being informed by the hospital that records of the disability certificates had been found.

“Such act of the Investigating Officer, in our opinion, can be termed as causing mental agony, lowering down dignity and ill-treating the petitioner, an academician. The prosecution initiated by the said officer can be termed as malicious which has not only caused harassment to the petitioner but also immeasurable anguish. The fact that the petitioner, a handicap person is an academician having good repute an employee of National Defence Academy, Pune and the acts done with clandestine manner by the Investigating Officer, in our opinion, warrant award of compensation as has been prayed by him”, the court observed.

The court awarded compensation to be paid within six months by the State Government to the Maharashtra State Legal Services Authority, as per the petitioner's request. This amount would be deducted from the salary of Inspector Anand Pagare, the concerned investigating officer (IO).

Tiwari was booked under Sections 420 (cheating), 467 (forgery), 468 (forgery for purpose of cheating), and 471 (using as genuine a forged document) of the IPC.

The court had earlier issued a contempt notice to Pagare for not commenting on the issue in his affidavit when the court sought an explanation for his conduct.

According to the complaint, Tiwari had been employed at the National Defence Academy since 1997 and had submitted two disability certificates issued by Sassoon Hospital, Pune, dated February 26, 2009, and December 1, 2012, certifying a 41% disability. These certificates enabled him to claim certain benefits under the Persons With Disabilities Act, 1995.

When the certificates were sent to the hospital for verification, it claimed that from the available record, the certificates were not issued by it. The doctors whose signatures appeared on the certificates denied signing them, leading to suspicions of forgery and cheating.

However, the original record related to the disability certificate surfaced at the Sassoon Hospital, indicating that the certificates had been issued by the hospital. Thus, Tiwari filed the present writ petition to challenge the charges against him.

Tiwari argued that Pagare failed to reevaluate the case properly and overlooked the availability of the original record. This false prosecution violated his fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to live with dignity, he argued.

In response to the contempt notice, Pagare claimed that it was a bonafide mistake, as it was his first attachment with the police station, and he lacked experience of field investigation. He explained that he relied on statements from two doctors who denied their signatures on the disability certificate.

The court observed that despite receiving a communication from Sassoon Hospital on September 9, 2016, confirming the availability of the original record, Pagare did not reexamine the case. The doctors’ statements were obtained before the original records were located, the court noted.

The court acknowledged Pagare’s apology, but emphasized that his actions caused mental agony, compromised Tiwari's dignity, and constituted a malicious prosecution.

The court found that the charges against Tiwari were unsustainable and quashed the FIR and charge sheet against Tiwari. The court warned Pagare to be more diligent in carrying out his duty as a police officer and discharged the contempt notice.

Case no. – Writ Petition No. 1124 of 2018

Case Title – Dr. Kamal Chandra Tiwari v. State of Maharashtra & Anr.