Delhi Court orders framing charges against Uphaar Cinema Tragedy accused for cheating and procuring passport wrongfully

“The Accused thus, has induced the authority into acting in a certain way based on false/deficient information, benefiting therefrom, by way of gaining wrongfully by being issued the Passport, thereby committing offences punishable under Sections 420 IPC and Section 12 of the Passports Act,” the order read.

Case

The case stems from a December 2018 Delhi High Court judgment in a petition filed by the Association of the Victims of Uphaar Tragedy (AVUT). During the proceedings, it emerged that accused Sushil Ansal had obtained multiple passports by making false declarations or by suppressing material facts.

Ansal allegedly concealed the details of criminal cases pending against him as also the order of conviction, in the affidavit filed by him with the passport application filed by him in 2013.

He also concealed information related to other pending cases against him in the undertaking given with application filed in the year 2018 to manipulate the regional passport office (RPO) into issuing the passport.

Arguments

The state argued in the court that the accused had applied for passport issuance on multiple occasions in 2000, 2004 and 2013 suppressing facts.

The prosecution also argued that he had secured the passports using multiple addresses though without any thorough verification. The misdeclaration is primarily alleged for the application made in the year 2013, when Ansal filed an affidavit, affirming falsely that there were no criminal proceedings pending against him nor any order of conviction against him by any court, which claim was fallacious and misleading.

Opposing the submissions by the prosecution, Ansal argued in the court that the chargesheet was filed only for the offences punishable under Sections 177 (false information to the public servant), 181 (knowingly making a false statement under oath or affirmation to a public servant or other authorized person) of the IPС along with Section 12 of the Passports Act.

Further, the accused claimed in the court that Section 420 (cheating) of the IPC does not get attracted in the present case.

Findings

The CJM said that Ansal not only furnished false information where he was under an obligation to furnish the truth but he also filed a false affidavit with a public servant Both these offences are made out in the present case.

“In the sworn affidavit filed by him with the passport application filed by him in the year 2013, in the teeth of Section 12 of the Passports Act, as also to have concealed other cases pending against him in the undertaking given with application filed in the year 2018, to induce under misrepresentation, the RPO into issuing the Passport at the relevant time,” the court held.

The court highlighted that subsequent acknowledgment of ‘unintentional mistake’ by the accused cannot erode the previous culpability, as he had remained in possession and used the passport throughout which was procured based on misleading declarations in breach of the statutory requirements.