Fake Marksheet Case| Allahabad High Court Upholds Conviction Of Former BJP MLA Indra Pratap Tiwari

Read Time: 05 minutes


The convicts had forged marksheets to secure admission in K.S. Saket Postgraduate College, Faizabad. The case was lodged in 1992 on the basis of a complaint filed by the Principal of the college.

The Allahabad High Court recently dismissed the appeal preferred by former BJP (Bharatiya Janata Party) MLA (Member of Legislative Assembly) Indra Pratap Tiwari against his conviction in a fake marksheet case. 

The bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh refuted the argument raised opposing the conviction on technical grounds. Court said, "The technical objections taken at this stage have no relevance. The accused-appellants have forged their mark-sheets and took admission in the next class knowing it to be forged and thus, they have committed the offences under Sections 420, 468 and 471 IPC. The forgery was done with obvious purposes of utilizing the mark-sheets to secure admission".

Along with Tiwari, two others appeals were filed. One by Kripa Nidhan Tiwari and another by Phool Chandra Yadav challenging their conviction for the offence of forging their marksheets and fabricating the documents in a criminal conspiracy.

The court held, “From the evidence lead by the prosecution, the offences under Sections 420, 468 and 471 IPC are fully made out and proved against the accused-appellants and, the learned trial court has rightly convicted and sentenced the accused-appellants for the aforesaid offences.”

The case against the accused persons was registered in the year 1992 when the principal of K.S. Saket Postgraduate College, Faizabad filed a complaint with the Senior Superintendent of Police, Faizabad alleging that the accused persons had taken admission on the basis of the forged marksheets.

The accused persons got convicted in the year 2021 when Special Judge (MP/MLA)/Additional Sessions Judge, Faizabad convicted and sentenced them for the offences under Sections 420, 468 and 471 of the IPC.

Moving appeals before the high court, the counsel for the accused persons argued that the documents were not proved in accordance with the provisions of Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act.

However, the high court held that "the technical objections taken at the present stage had no relevance".

Moreover, court also rejected the contention raised regarding non-examination of the Investigating Officer. "It is well settled law that non-examination of the Investigating Officer is not fatal to the prosecution case if the prosecution case is otherwise proved by the evidence, and the evidence is in conformity with case made out in the FIR. Mere non-examination of the Investigating Officer, the prosecution case should not fail if it is otherwise proved by other evidence brought on record," the bench observed. 

Therefore, holding that forgery was done with obvious purposes of utilizing the mark sheets to secure admission, court upheld the conviction of the accused persons. 

Case Title: Indra Pratap Tiwari v. State of UP and Connected matters