FIR Prima Facie Implicates School Managements In Alleged ISBN Forgery: Madhya Pradesh HC Rejects Bail Plea Of School Principals
The Madhya Pradesh High Court rejected the bail applications of various School managements prima facie implicated in allegations of deriving undue pecuniary benefits from alleged forgery of ISBN of school books.
A Single Bench of Justice Maninder S. Bhatti observed, “The First Information Reports prima facie implicate the Management of the Schools and there are allegations of deriving undue pecuniary benefits and also allegations of forgery of ISBN. The allegations are against the Management of the School and though some of the applicants are claiming that they are working as Principals but as per the records, they are members of the Management Society and are in Management committee running educational institutions, therefore, prima facie they are connected with the affairs of the School Management.”
Sr. Advocate Brian D'Silva appeared for the applicant, while GA G.S. Thakur represented the State.
The applicants filed various applications under Sections 439 and 438 of the CrPC for the grant of anticipatory bail and regular bail for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 409, 468, 471 and 120-B of the IPC.
Government Authorities were issued directions to lodge FIRs against the Management of various schools and booksellers who were selling books to school students and employees. This directive followed numerous complaints from parents about excessive fee hikes and the sale of books with forged or duplicate International Standard Book Numbers (ISBN).
Committees were subsequently formed to investigate these allegations against the Management and office bearer of the Managing Committee of the Schools, book sellers and publishers
The applicants pointed out that the fee regulation in private schools is governed by The Madhya Pradesh Niji Vidyalaya (Fees Tatha Sambandhit Vishayon Ka Viniyaman) Adhiniyam, 2017 (the 2017 Act), which provided procedures for fee increments and penalties for violations, without provisions for criminal charges.
It was contended that the allegations of forgery were baseless and that the appropriate recourse for any fee-related grievances lay within the civil domain as stipulated by the 2017 Act.
After considering the submissions and reviewing the case diary, the Court noted that the complaints from parents and the subsequent inquiries revealed a prima facie case against the school management and related parties. The Court pointed out the allegations' gravity, including the nexus between school management, booksellers, and publishers, and the potential impact on public trust in educational institutions.
“It reflects that they are also the members and office bearers of the Management Society/Committee and they have filed separate applications in the capacity of Principals and members of the Society, therefore, it is hereby clarified that the applications filed by the applicants who are working as the Principals only, have been allowed for the reasons mentioned in their respective orders and the bail applications filed in the capacity of members/office bearers of the Managing Committee have been rejected for the reasons mentioned hereinabove,” the Court remarked.
Consequently, the Court held, “Thus, looking to the nature of allegations against the applicant, this Court is not inclined to release/enlarge the applicants on bail.”
Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the applications.
Cause Title: Shaji Thomas v. The State Of Madhya Pradesh
Appearance:
Applicant: Sr. Advocate Brian D'Silva; Advocate Abhishek Dilraj
State: GA G.S. Thakur; Dy. GA Bramhadatt Singh