Allahabad HC quashes cheating case against international shooter Vartika Singh

As per the order, it was submitted that Rajneesh sent a letter to the applicant via WhatsApp, showing the recommendation of the applicant as an NCW member, and informed her that it was duly signed by the then Cabinet Minister and addressed to the Prime Minister.

In June 2020, the order noted, Rajneesh informed the applicant over the phone regarding a second letter issued from the PMO. A screenshot of the alleged letter was forwarded.

In November 2020, however, the order noted, Rajneesh informed the applicant over a WhatsApp call that the appointment will be done only if she paid Rs 25,00,000.

To confirm the aforesaid demand, the order stated, Rajneesh sent a third unsigned letter of the Government of India, regarding the appointment of the applicant. Since, the applicant refused to give any bribe, it was informed that the letter could not be signed.

As per Vartika’s lawyer, the applicant met then Minister Smriti Irani at her residence and provided photocopies of the three letters sent by Rajneesh but received no positive response. Four FIRs were then lodged against the applicant — two in Delhi and two in Amethi.

As per the order, the applicant’s counsel submitted that the FIR was lodged on the basis of concocted facts, alleging that the applicant forged the documents and levelled allegations against Rajneesh with the intention of damaging his image.

He further submitted that the applicant had been defamed and victimised by Rajneesh and despite there being no evidence against the applicant, a chargesheet was submitted by the Investigating Officer in the most mechanical manner.

Therefore, the lawyer said, the impugned proceeding is a malicious one and is liable to be quashed in relation to the applicant.

The AGA vehemently opposed the applicant’s prayer and submitted that all these facts can be raised before the court at the appropriate stage.

The court, in its order on December 19, said, “… it is evident from the record that since April 2020, one Rajneesh Singh claimed he was… close to the then cabinet minister [and] lured the applicant for nominating her as a Member of National Women Commission, New Delhi… Thereafter, money was also demanded from her on 7.11.2020… A complaint was made by the applicant, providing copies of letters… forwarded by Rajneesh Singh on her WhatsApp. But [instead] of examining the complaint… a chargesheet was submitted by the Investigating Officer, with the allegation that forged documents were prepared by the applicant… But no letter was sent to the FSL for an examination to determine whether these letters were prepared by the applicant or not…”

“In such circumstances, there is no evidence against the applicant for making forged letters,” said the court.

“As it is held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sheila Sebastian (supra) that [if] there is no evidence that documents were prepared by the accused, then no offence of forgery is made out. There is no evidence of cheating against the applicant in the entire material available before this court… accordingly, impugned proceeding is liable to be set aside,” the court added.

“In view of the above, the present application is allowed and the entire proceedings of criminal case… are hereby set aside in relation to the applicant,” it further added.