Allahabad High Court Refuses to Quash FIR in ₹22 Lakh PhD Job Scam Case, Warns of “Dangerous Social Acceptance of Corruption”

By Rajesh Pandey

In a strongly worded observation on the deepening erosion of ethical standards in society, the Allahabad High Court declined to quash an FIR lodged against a woman accused of cheating an aspirant of more than ₹22 lakh on the false promise of securing a PhD admission and an assistant professor’s job.

The Court underlined that the allegations reflect a disturbing and widespread belief among citizens that academic degrees and university appointments can be procured through bribery and influence.

A Division Bench comprising Justice J.J. Munir and Justice Tarun Saxena dismissed the writ petition filed by the accused, Priyanka Senger, who had sought the quashing of criminal proceedings initiated against her.

The Court emphasised that the case exposes a “very chilling trend” in society, where even educated individuals are increasingly inclined to believe that corruption can bypass established legal and institutional procedures.

The Bench observed that such offences strike at the very moral foundation of society and must be dealt with firmly.

The Court remarked that the facts alleged in the FIR demonstrate a worrying decline in ethical values, stating that crimes of this nature cannot be allowed to go unpunished if society wishes to restore its moral balance and credibility in public institutions.

The FIR was lodged by complainant Tanya Dixit in Kanpur, alleging that Priyanka Senger, along with co-accused Vikram Singh Sengar, Tripti Singh Sengar and Sanya Singh Sengar, had fraudulently assured her admission into a PhD programme at a university in Aligarh.

The accused also allegedly promised to secure her appointment as an assistant professor at a university in Kanpur.

Trusting these assurances, the complainant and her mother reportedly transferred a sum of ₹22,18,000 into the bank accounts of the accused persons.

According to the FIR, the complainant never formally applied for either the PhD programme or the teaching post.

Instead, in June 2024, the accused allegedly handed over a set of forged documents to her, including a fabricated PhD mark sheet, admission confirmation letter, research topic approval letter and even an appointment letter directing her to join the university in July 2024.

Suspicion arose when the complainant visited the university with the appointment letter.

The University Registrar informed her that the documents were entirely fake and that the signatures appearing on them had been forged.

When the complainant confronted the accused and threatened legal action, they allegedly issued threats of death and also warned her of false implication in serious criminal offences.

Consequently, an FIR dated September 14, 2024, was registered at Swaroop Nagar Police Station in Kanpur under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code relating to cheating, along with other relevant penal provisions.

During the hearing, counsel appearing for the accused argued that the FIR should be quashed on the ground of parity, pointing out that interim relief had been granted to two other co-accused by the High Court in connected proceedings.

However, the Bench rejected this contention, clarifying that the earlier orders cited were merely interim in nature and did not conclusively determine the merits of the case.

The Court underscored that admission to a PhD programme and recruitment to a university teaching position are governed by strict statutory procedures, including public advertisement of vacancies, eligibility screening and selection processes. Such positions cannot be obtained through informal arrangements or financial inducements.

While clarifying that the Court was not making any final determination on the truthfulness of the allegations at this stage, the Bench observed that the seriousness and nature of the accusations warranted a thorough and fair investigation by the police authorities.

Holding that the case did not merit interference under Article 226 of the Constitution, which grants High Courts the power to issue writs in appropriate circumstances, the Bench concluded that the investigative process should be allowed to proceed unhindered.

Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the writ petition on March 31, reiterating that allegations pointing to systemic corruption and fraudulent manipulation of academic and recruitment processes must be examined with utmost seriousness in order to preserve public confidence in educational institutions and the rule of law.