Allahabad High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail To Lawyer Facing FIR Over Allegedly Fake Law Degree
HC notes University had not definitively confirmed that degree was forged; it had only been returned as 'unverified'
The Allahabad High Court has granted anticipatory bail to a lawyer facing an FIR over an allegedly fake law degree. The Court observed that the mere fact that the degree was returned 'unverified' from the University was not sufficient, at the prima facie stage, to establish that the document was forged.
A bench of Justice Rajiv Lochan Shukla passed the order while hearing an anticipatory bail application filed by one Gaurang Brijvasi in connection with an FIR registered under BNS for the offences of Cheating and Forgery.
The FIR was lodged after the applicant's law degree was sent for verification during renewal of his Certificate of Practice.
According to the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh, the document was returned 'unverified', after which the FIR was registered pursuant to directions issued by the High Court in Mohammad Kafeel Versus State of U.P. and Another, 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 432.
During the hearing, counsel for the applicant submitted that merely because the law degree had not been verified, or had been returned 'unverified', it could not automatically be concluded that the document was forged.
The Court found substance in the submission, at least at the prima facie stage.
"In the prima facie opinion of the Court, the contention of the Learned counsel for the applicant appears to have substance", the Bench observed.
The Court noted that the investigation was still in progress and, importantly, there was "no definitive reply from the University in question" stating that the applicant's degree was forged or explaining why the document had been returned 'unverified'.
The High Court further noted that the alleged offence appeared to be related to documentary evidence and that custodial interrogation of the applicant was not required.
The Court also took note of the fact that the applicant had no criminal antecedents. It also noted that, according to his affidavit, he claimed he was not in active practice.
Taking these circumstances into account, the Court held that a case for the grant of anticipatory bail until the submission of the police report was made out.
Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application was allowed.
The applicant was directed to make himself available for interrogation whenever required, not influence or threaten persons acquainted with the facts of the case, not leave India without prior permission of the Court, and not pressurize or intimidate prosecution witnesses.
The High Court clarified that its observations in the order were exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and were not to be treated as an opinion on the merits of the case.
Case Title - Gaurang Brijvasi vs. State of U.P. and Another 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 743
Case Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 743