“Aachar Parmo Dharma”: Allahabad High Court Denies Bail to Advocate Accused of Forging Class XII Marksheet
By Rajesh Pandey
In a strongly worded order underscoring the ethical foundations of the legal profession, the Allahabad High Court has refused bail to an advocate accused of forging his Class XII marksheet to secure enrolment with the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh.
Describing the allegations as a “grave fraud upon the justice delivery system,” the Court observed that when an advocate—an officer of the court—resorts to deception, it strikes at the very core of judicial integrity.
“Righteous Conduct Is the Highest Duty”
While rejecting the bail plea of Ashish Shukla, Justice Krishan Pahal invoked the Sanskrit maxim “Aachar Parmo Dharma”—meaning righteous conduct is the highest duty.
The Court emphasised that those entrusted with upholding the law must exemplify integrity not merely in words but in conduct.
In a stern observation, the Court stated that the nobility of the legal profession rests upon unwavering honesty, fidelity to the rule of law, and ethical discipline. Any leniency in such cases, it held, would compromise the sanctity and credibility of the institution of justice.
“An advocate is not merely a professional engaged in litigation; he is a vital pillar in the administration of justice. The court cannot afford misplaced sympathy in matters of this nature,” the judge observed.
Charges Against the Advocate
The applicant, a registered advocate with the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh, sought bail in connection with offences under Sections 420 (cheating), 467 (forgery of valuable security), 468 (forgery for cheating), and 471 (using forged documents as genuine) of the Indian Penal Code.
The case originated from a complaint submitted by an advocate to the President of the Kanpur Bar Association, alleging that Shukla had fabricated his educational credentials to gain enrolment as a lawyer.
The complaint was subsequently forwarded to the Commissioner of Police, leading to the registration of an FIR.
Discrepancy in Educational Records
According to the prosecution, Shukla had claimed that he cleared his Intermediate (Class XII) examination in 1994. However, official records from the Uttar Pradesh Board indicated that he had failed the examination.
Despite multiple notices, the accused allegedly failed to produce his original Class XII certificates before the investigating officer.
His explanation—that the documents had been destroyed by termites—was found unconvincing by the Court.
The Bench noted that the “termite” defence appeared selective and inconsistent with the official report from the education board, which categorically stated that he had failed the examination.
Arrest and Cancellation of Anticipatory Bail
A Sessions Court in Kanpur had earlier cancelled his anticipatory bail in November last year after he failed to comply with conditions, including submission of complete educational credentials to investigators.
He was later arrested in December in Nainital, where he was reportedly vacationing.
Defence Arguments Rejected
Seeking bail, the defence argued that only the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh—not the Bar Association President—had the authority to verify educational credentials.
It was also alleged that the complaint stemmed from personal rivalry linked to a legal dispute involving the applicant’s father.
However, the High Court was not persuaded by these submissions.
It was observed that prima facie evidence suggested that the applicant had misrepresented himself as having passed the Class XII examination and had used forged documents not only to obtain a law degree but also to secure registration as an advocate.
Court’s Observations on Professional Integrity
The Court underscored that the allegations involve serious offences of cheating and forgery that undermine public faith in the justice system.
By allegedly fabricating academic qualifications, the accused not only deceived regulatory authorities but also jeopardised the interests of litigants who relied upon him for legal representation.
Holding that such acts erode trust in the legal profession and weaken institutional credibility, the Court refused to grant bail in its order dated January 6.
The ruling sends a clear message that members of the legal fraternity will be held to the highest standards of ethical and professional conduct.
#AllahabadHighCourt #JudicialIntegrity #LegalProfession #BarCouncilUP #ForgeryCase #RuleOfLaw #CourtOrder #LegalEthics
