E-Paper
Delhi HC refuses to quash charges in 2017 Haryana judicial paper leak case
The HC said in cases where digital or electronic evidence is available, the prosecution’s case cannot be thrown at the initial stage.
The Delhi high court has upheld Chandigarh’s trial court’s order and dismissed a petition by Balwinder Kumar Sharma, former registrar (recruitment) of the Punjab and Haryana high court, challenging charges framed against him in a case of paper leak of Haryana Civil Services (Judicial Branch) preliminary examination, 2017.
The HC said in cases where digital or electronic evidence is available, the prosecution’s case cannot be thrown at the initial stage. The record indicated that Sharma had the question paper immediately before the alleged leakage.
“The case is very sensitive and the evidence which is required to be led to prove the case is either digital or documentary in nature,” Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma said.
The high court further said the jurisdiction of the court while entertaining the revision petition is also very limited, and it can interfere in the challenged order only if there is any serious illegality, infirmity or perversity in the trial court’s order.
“I do not find any illegality, infirmity or perversity in the order of the trial court. Hence, the present petition along with pending applications stands dismissed,” Justice Sharma said.
The high court upheld a January 31, 2020, order of a sessions court in Chandigarh by which charges were framed against Sharma for the alleged offences of cheating, criminal breach of trust by a public servant, criminal conspiracy and destruction of evidence under the Indian Penal Code and the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
In 2021, the Supreme Court transferred the case to Delhi at the request of Sharma. An FIR in the matter involving the paper leak was lodged on the complaint of the Punjab and Haryana high court in 2017. He was suspended by the Punjab and Haryana high court in 2017 after the paper leak.
According to the prosecution, the question paper remained in the custody of Sharma, the then registrar (recruitment), from the time the question paper was finalised till the dispatch to the examination centre.
It was alleged that a co-accused, Sunita, was known to be in acquaintance with Sharma and he had given a copy of the question paper to her who further forwarded it to others for consideration of money.
Additional public prosecutor Charanjit Singh Bakhshi, representing Chandigarh, and advocate Amit Sahni contended that it was an open-and-shut case since Sharma was a public servant who had dishonestly and fraudulently misappropriated and converted for his use the question paper of the exam entrusted to him.
The lawyers said the question paper was under his control as a public servant and he allegedly allowed Sunita to have its access, therefore he was guilty of committing the offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
While dismissing Sharma’s plea challenging the framing of charges against him, the high court said that at the stage of charges, the court was required to examine the record produced by the prosecution and the CrPC does not confer any right upon the accused to produce any document at that stage.
“However, in exceptional cases where a document may show the prosecution as preposterous, the same can be considered depending upon the peculiar facts and circumstances. However, in the present case, there is no such material,” the court said.
