NEW DELHI, May 10 -- A police constable who obtained employment in Bihar Police while serving in Jharkhand Police under an assumed name and using forged documents paid a heavy price when the Supreme Court set aside both appointments and directed the initiation of criminal proceedings against him. The court observed that employment in public service, especially in a disciplined force, cannot be obtained through fraud. Scoffing at such a conduct, a bench of justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and R Mahadevan said, "Public employment, particularly in the police service, cannot be converted into an instrument of fraud. If individuals entrusted with enforcing the law themselves secure entry into service through deception and fabricated credentials, it would seriously erode the rule of law." While the issue brought before the court was a service matter arising from an order of dismissal passed by the Jharkhand Police, the top court not only upheld this order but used its extraordinary power under Article 142 of the Constitution of India to set aside the appointment order of the Bihar Police issued subsequently and directed the delinquent constable Ranjan Kumar to face criminal prosecution. "The matter does not rest merely within the realm of departmental misconduct. The allegations, now reinforced by forensic findings, prima facie disclose the commission of cognizable offences such as cheating, impersonation, forgery, use of forged documents and furnishing false information to public authorities under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita," the bench said. In these circumstances, while restoring the disciplinary action, it is both necessary and appropriate to direct initiation of criminal proceedings in accordance with law, the court held, directing police chiefs of Bihar and Jharkhand to examine the matter and take appropriate steps. Any criminal proceedings shall be decided on their own merits, the court said. The facts presented a bizarre case where Ranjan applied against a public advertisement and got appointed as a constable in Jharkhand Police on May 18, 2005. Simultaneously, he even applied for employment in Bihar Police. He served for two years as a reserve guard at Dhurki police station in Jharkhand. On December 20, 2007 he obtained a short leave till December 23 but failed to join duty. A few days later, he joined Bihar Police on December 26, 2007 under a forged identity of Santosh Kumar with fabricated documents to secure appointment. In January 2008, he abandoned service after joining which led to an enquiry to be ordered by the Patna police in June 2008. The investigation revealed that Ranjan Kumar and Santosh Kumar are the same person and he fraudulently obtained employment under an assumed name, altering his father's name and identity certificates. The result of the enquiry was forwarded to the Superintendent of Police, Garhwa of Jharkhand Police which ordered his dismissal on August 20, 2010. The punishment was upheld by the appellate authority and the revisional authority pursuant to which he approached the Jharkhand high court. A single judge upheld the punishment in October 2015. Later, on appeal, a division bench ruled in his favour on August 25, 2022 on the ground that the fact he obtained service in Bihar Police has not been established. This order was challenged by the Jharkhand police before the top court. The bench held that the HC "erred" in upsetting the dismissal order. The court rested its reasoning on the anvil that enquiry by Jharkhand police based on documentary evidence proved the allegation of fraud. "The allegations concern a deliberate and premeditated fraud upon two State police forces, by securing or attempting to secure public employment under two different names with inconsistent parentage particulars, supported by fabricated or manipulated documents," said justice Mahadevan, writing the judgment for the bench. The dismissal order was found to be "proportionate, justified" as the allegations in this case pertained to impersonation, fraud, use of forged credentials, dual employment in police departments and unauthorised absence. "The continuance of such an employee in service would be wholly detrimental to institutional discipline, public confidence, and the credibility of the police force," the judgment said. To clear any doubts, even the top court called for an enquiry by the Bihar Director General of Police. This report received on April 11 this year concluded that forensic comparison of fingerprints, biometric records, and photographs established that "Ranjan Kumar" and "Santosh Kumar" were the one and the same person. The court held a deeper scrutiny of genealogical records and electoral rolls and found that the variance in the father's name and surname formed part of a manipulated identity trail rather than proof of separate persons. The court held, "A member of the police force is expected to maintain the highest degree of integrity, honesty and discipline. Fraud at the threshold of entry into service strikes at the very root of public employment. In the present case, the material available goes far beyond mere suspicion and reasonably establishes a conscious course of deceit adopted by respondent for obtaining employment benefits from two sovereign employers in a disciplined force." The facts of the case further led the court to hold, "We deem it necessary to exercise our jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, to do complete justice in the matter. Accordingly, the appointment of respondent 'Santosh Kumar', son of Kamta Sharma as a constable in the Bihar Police is set aside. The consequences, in law, shall follow." The Jharkhand police had argued that the HC order setting aside the dismissal will mean that persons who engage in such fraud to get employment will go scot-free. The court held the dismissal was carried out after a "fair and lawful" enquiry and the HC was not justified in reappreciating the evidence and setting aside the punishment imposed....