'Grave Fraud On Justice System': Allahabad High Court Denies Bail To Advocate Accused Of Forging Marksheet To Enter Bar

The Allahabad High Court recently refused bail to an advocate who has been accused of forging his Class XII Marksheet and getting himself registered with the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh on the basis of the said document.

A bench of Justice Krishan Pahal quoted the Sanskrit Shloka "आचारः परमो धर्मः।" [Meaning: Righteous conduct is the highest duty.] to stress that an advocate is an officer of the Court, and when he himself resorts to such illegality, it constitutes a grave and deliberate fraud upon the institution of justice

"Thus, for those upholding the law, their behavior is more important than their words. An advocate is not merely a professional engaged in litigation; he is a vital pillar in the administration of justice. The nobility of the legal profession rests upon unwavering integrity, honesty, and fidelity to the rule of law....The Court cannot afford to show leniency in matters of this nature, for any misplaced sympathy would amount to compromising the sanctity and credibility of the legal profession," the bench remarked.

BRIEFLY PUT, the applicant (Ashish Shukla), a registered advocate with the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh, approached the High Court seeking bail in a case under Sections 420 (Cheating), 467 (Forgery of valuable security), 468 (Forgery for purpose of cheating) and 471 (Using as genuine a forged document) IPC.

The FIR against him was lodged following a complaint made by an advocate to the President of the Kanpur Bar Association, alleging that Shukla had forged his educational credentials to secure his registration. This complaint was later forwarded by the Bar President to the Commissioner of Police with a recommendation for lodging an FIR.

The investigation revealed that although Shukla claimed to have passed his Intermediate (Class XII) examination in 1994, official records from the UP Board showed he had failed the examination. Despite repeated notices, he could not produce the Class-XII educational certificates before the Investigating Officer, as he claimed they were missing.

The Sessions Judge cancelled his anticipatory bail in November last year for failing to comply with the conditions, including furnishing his complete educational credentials before the Investigating Officer. In December last year, he was arrested in Nainital, where he was on vacation.

Seeking bail in the case, the applicant's counsel argued that the Bar Association President could not have lodged the complaint as only the competent authority, namely the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh, was empowered to verify the genuineness of his educational credentials.

He also alleged that the Bar Association President was an interested party in the case, as he forwarded the complaint out of personal rivalry stemming from a case involving the applicant's father.

It was also noted that the Secretary of the Bar Association officially refuted the President's actions, stating that the Bar Association's by-laws and rules were not followed in forwarding the complaint against the applicant.

He claimed that the arrest memo did not specify the grounds for his arrest and merely stated that a reward of Rs. 25,000 had been declared against him.

Importantly, it was his categorical submission that the documents pertaining to Class-XIIth of the applicant have been destroyed by termites and are therefore impossible to be furnished.

Opposing his bail plea, the state's counsel contended that the applicant had secured his Bar registration on the basis of forged and fabricated documents and is thereby playing with the lives and liberty of innocent and helpless litigants. As such, it was argued that he is not entitled to be granted bail.

High Court's observations

At the outset, the bench rejected the applicant's contention that the termite had selectively destroyed the Class-XIIth certificate. The bench also noted that his stance was contradicted by the report received from the board officials, which states that the applicant failed the Class-XII examination.

The bench concluded that the material on record prima facie established that the applicant had failed in the Class-XIIth examination and yet falsely represented himself as having passed the same.

"...by projecting forged and fabricated educational documents...he not only obtained his graduation and law degrees but also secured registration as an advocate," the bench remarked.

The Court also found fault with the explanation put forth by the applicant regarding the alleged destruction of the Class-XIIth documents by termites. The Single Judge added that it appeared impossible that, while other educational records were admittedly intact, only the Class XII marksheet was damaged by termites.

It also took into account that the applicant had failed to comply with the specific conditions imposed while granting anticipatory bail, which reflects his disregard for the judicial process.

Thus, stressing that the allegations relate to serious offences involving cheating and forgery, which strike at the very root of the legal profession and erode public confidence in the administration of justice, the bench denied him bail.

Case title - Ashish Shukla vs State Of UP 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 70

Case ciation : 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 70

Click Here To Read/Download Order