HC upholds discharge of NDA principal from CBI case

MUMBAI: The Bombay high court has discharged Dr Om Prakash Shukla, principal of the National Defence Academy (NDA), from criminal proceedings launched by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), for having secured the job allegedly by using forged and fabricated documents. CBI had registered the case in May 2018 against Dr Shukla and four other professors who were booked for similar charges.

In 2017, the CBI had undertaken a preliminary inquiry after receiving reports that some professors at NDA had secured jobs by using forged and fabricated documents to fulfil the required qualifications. In May 2018, the agency registered a regular case, booking Dr Shukla, and professors Dr Jagmohan Meher, Dr Vanita Puri, Dr. Rajeev Bansal and Dr. Maheswar Roy.

It was alleged that they secured jobs in connivance with some unknown officials of the Union Public Service Commission and the Ministry of Defence, although they did not possess mandatory teaching/research experience, and used forged and false certificates indicating their services experience, teaching experience, and exaggerated Academic Performance Indicator (API) score.

They were charged under Sections 120-B (criminal conspiracy), 420 (cheating), 465 (forgery), 471 (forgery for the purpose of cheating) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 13 (2) and 13(1) (d) (criminal misconduct by a public servant) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

After completing the investigation, CBI filed a chargesheet against Dr Shukla in 2020, claiming that its investigation revealed that in 2007-08, Dr Shukla, dishonestly and fraudulently, secured appointment as professor in Economics and as principal in 2011 at NDA, on the basis of false claims made in his applications to UPSC regarding his research experience, and, thereby, cheated the Ministry of Defence.

Dr Shukla, however, claimed to be innocent and filed for discharge. A judicial magistrate at Pune in April 2022 allowed his plea and discharged him, noting that the issue of purported inadequate experience was raked up years after his appointment as professor in economics in February 2008 and elevation as principal in 2011.

The magistrate court also noted that the principal had essential educational qualifications and experience, and the UPSC should have verified the documents at the time of his selection. “However, the UPSC failed to verify the same,” said the court, adding that, therefore, the prosecution had failed to show that there were sufficient grounds to proceed against the accused.

In January 2023, the Pune sessions court had upheld the order, after which the CBI had approached the high court, where justice Shyam C Chandak found no error in the approach of the lower courts and dismissed the appeal filed by the central agency.