You are on page 1of 62

SYNOPSIS & LIST OF DATES

The Petitioner is a Member of Parliament from Rajya Sabha and has


been Chief Minister of State of Madhya Pradesh for 10 years. Being a
public figure, the Petitioner has been serving the people of this
country for the last forty years. As a man of impeccable integrity, the
Petitioner is being subjected to humiliation as being an accomplice to
someone who had allegedly fabricated and forged evidence in
VYAPAM cases to mislead the investigation.
The Petitioner prefers the present Writ Petition in order to protect his
fundamental rights as the reputation of the Petitioner in the society,
which the Petitioner has earned with integrity and service to the State
of Madhya Pradesh, for last 40 years has been tarnished by the
allegations that the Petitioner herein had fabricated and forged
evidence in order to mislead the investigation in Crime No. 539/2013
lodged at Police Station, Rajender Nagar, Indore of VYAPAM case.
The allegation finds its source from a report dated 22.04.2015 of
Special Investigation Team (SIT) regarding the material sent by an
External Whistle Blower, a computer expert to High Court of Madhya
Pradesh on directions of the Delhi High Court. The whistleblower had
produced incriminating material regarding tampering of Evidence by
Indore Police in the Excel Sheet maintained by Nitin Mohindra
(accused; principal system analyst; VYAPAM Official) and the direct
beneficiary being the sitting Chief Minister of MP viz. Mr. Shivraj
Singh Chauhan. The whistleblower had assisted Indore police and

STF in investigation of VYAPAM cases in the capacity of a consultant.


In the original excel sheet regarding recruitment of Samvida Shiksha
Varg-II, III and AG-3, which is part of evidence and chargesheet
under Crime No. 19/2013 and Crime No. 20/2013 filed by Special
Task

Force

(STF),

CM

featured

at

48

places

as

recommedor/sponsor of candidates which was either replaced with


Umabharatiji, Rajbhawan, M/s and Minister or altogether
deleted.

The excel sheet featured the name, roll number of a

candidate, the recommender and the examination for which the


candidate approached the recommender to qualify.
The External whistleblower had approached the Petitioner herein in
December 2014/January 2015 under threat of life and limb from high
profile persons of Madhya Pradesh and police agencies of Madhya
Pradesh as the Whistleblower

was privy to very sensitive

incriminating/ damaging information regarding the involvement of


Chief Minister and Chief Ministers family in VYAPAM scam. The
Petitioner on the basis of the information and documents provided by
the Whistle blower submitted a representation to SIT on 16.02.2015
with the original excel sheet, but no action was taken by either SIT or
STF in that behalf.
A Report was prepared by the SIT on 22.04.2015, on basis of the
demonstration given by staff of STF (Special Task Force), which is ill
equipped and ill trained to handle the nuances of digital forensics.
The SIT in its wisdom considered it appropriate to neither summon

the whistleblower who had provided the material nor called upon the
Truth Lab, Bangalore to demonstrate the veracity of the Evidence.
The Truth Lab, Bangalore is a renowned and reputed forensic lab of
the Country and had certified and authenticated the material provided
by the Whistleblower on whistleblowers request.
The said report of the SIT was presented before the High Court of
Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur in its Monitoring jurisdiction in W.P.
6385/2014 on 24.04.2015 whereby the High Court agreed with the
prima facie finding of the SIT without application of mind and in a
monitoring jurisdiction gave a prima facie finding in the order.
It is submitted that at both forums i.e. before SIT or High Court, the
Petitioner was not present as no intimation or summon was issued by
either of the forums to explain the stand of the Petitioner herein and
the proceedings were undertaken behind the back of the Petitioner.
Thereafter, the sitting Chief Minister, Mr. Shivraj Singh Chauhan on
26.04.2015 held a press conference at his residence proclaiming that
the Petitioner has been lying all along regarding the original excel
sheet, that the Petitioner has forged evidence and the Chief Minister
has been given a clean chit by the SIT and the High Court of M.P.
at

Jabalpur

vide report dated 22.04.2015 and order dated

24.04.2015. The press conference was widely reported in all the


leading newspapers of Madhya Pradesh with the statement of Chief
Minister.

This Honble Court in Kiran Bedi v. Committee of Inquiry, (1989) 1


SCC 494 at page 514 made a reference to the following excerpt from
Bhagwat Gita:
Paragraph 22.
The following words of caution uttered by the Lord to Arjun
in Bhagwad Gita with regard to dishonour or loss of reputation may
usefully be quoted:
Akirtinchapi bhutani kathaishyanti te-a-vyayam, Sambha-vitasya
Chakirtir maranadatirichyate. (2.34)
(Men will recount thy perpetual dishonour, and to one highly
esteemed, dishonour exceedeth death.)
Paragraph 24.
In Corpus Juris Secundum, Vol. 77 at p. 268 is to be found the
statement of law in the following terms:
It is stated in the definition Person, 70 C.J.S. p. 688 note 66 that
legally the term person includes not only the physical body and
members, but also every bodily sense and personal attribute, among
which is the reputation a man has acquired. Blackstone in
his Commentaries classifies and distinguishes those rights which are
annexed to the person, jura personarum, and acquired rights in
external objects, jura rerum; and in the former he includes personal
security, which consists in a person's legal and uninterrupted
enjoyment of his life, his limbs, his body, his health, and his
reputation. And he makes the corresponding classification of
remedies. The idea expressed is that a man's reputation is a part of

himself, as his body and limbs are, and reputation is a sort of right to
enjoy the good opinion of others, and it is capable of growth and real
existence, as an arm or leg. Reputation is, therefore, a personal right,
and the right to reputation is put among those absolute personal
rights equal in dignity and importance to security from violence.
According to Chancellor Kent as a part of the rights of personal
security, the preservation of every person's good name from the vile
arts of detraction is justly included. The laws of the ancients, no less
than those of modern nations, made private reputation one of the
objects of their protection.
The right to the enjoyment of a good reputation is a valuable
privilege, of ancient origin, and necessary to human society, as
stated in Libel and Slander Section 4, and this right is within the
constitutional guaranty of personal security as stated in Constitutional
Law Section 205, and a person may not be deprived of this right
through falsehood and violence without liability for the injury as stated
in Libel and Slander Section 4.
Detraction from a man's reputation is an injury to his personality, and
thus an injury to reputation is a personal injury, that is, an injury to an
absolute personal right.
The Petitioner is approaching this Honble Court as the order of the
High Court of M.P. at Jabalpur dated 24.04.2015 was passed in
its monitoring jurisdiction, the proceedings of which are attended only
by an Additional Advocate General of State of M.P. who is present in
capacity of Counsel for STF (investigating agency) and the officers of

STF. No other Counsel, petitioner, Applicant is allowed in those


proceedings. Hence the Petitioner has no other efficacious remedy
and approaching this Honble Court under Article 32 read with Article
21 of the Constitution of India.

1970-2007

The

Madhya

Mandal

Pradesh

(hereinafter

Vyavasaik

shall

be

Pariksha

referred

as

VYAPAM M.P. Professional Examination Board)


was formed and entrusted with duty to conduct
Professional Examinations in 1970. Subsequently
in 2007 VYAPAM was also entrusted with a duty
to

conduct

various

examinations

appointment/recruitments
departments
Transport,

this

in

included

Education,

for

Government

departments

Dairy,

Wight

like
and

Measures, police, excise etc.


Thus VYAPAM became a single window for
entrance in Professional Courses as well as
getting appointments in various Government
Services.
07.07.2013

An F.I.R being F.I.R No. 539 of 2013 was lodged


in Police Station Rajendra Nagar, Indore, Madhya
Pradesh

against

unknown

persons

under

Sections 419, 420, 467, 468 I.P.C. on a complaint


that certain students with false identity cards are
staying at a hotel to appear on behalf of other
candidates in PMT examination.
18.07.2013

As per the chargesheet filed in Crime No.19/2013


and 20/2013 relating to recruitment examination
of Samvida Shiksha Varg-II/III, the Indore police
seized the office computer of Nitin Mohindra
(Principal

Analyst

VYAPAM;

Accused)

from

Bhopal VYAPAM office at 04.30 pm.


As per the Petitioners information (provided by
the whistleblower), the services of computer
experts were requisitioned by the Indore Police
as well as by the STF to assist investigation. A
renowned computer expert (the whistleblower)
who has been assisting various Government
departments in data recovery was summoned
and asked to recover the data, which was
allegedly deleted by the writer, i.e., Mr. Nitin
Mohindra before the seizure of its hard disk on
18.07.2013.

The

said

computer

expert

(whistleblower) succeeded in recovery of the


original data and saved a copy of the same
through the help of the software installed in the

Computer. However, the copies of the Excel


Sheet filed by the STF before the Honble High
Court of Madhya Pradesh in FIR No.19/2013 and
20/2013 contain material alterations, deletions
and substitutions, that tantamount to tampering
with evidence, which is required to be produced
before the Court of law.
As per the original deleted excel sheet retrieved
by Indore police with help of Computer Expert
(whistleblower) on 18.07.2013, CM featured at
48

places

as

recommendor/sponsor

for

candidates appearing for Samvida Shiksha VargII/III and AG-III. The said specific entries were
either replaced with others like Umabharatiji,
Minister, Rajbhawan and M/s or altogether
deleted. This information is authenticated and
certified by Truth labs, Bangalore, a private
reputed forensic lab in a detailed report. The
aforesaid tampering of evidence was done by
Indore police, direct beneficiary being the Chief
Minister of State, Mr. Shivraj Singh Chauhan.
22.07.2013

As per the chargesheet filed in Crime No.


19/2013 and 20/2013 relating to recruitment of
Samvida Shiksha Varg-II/III, the Indore police

sent the hard disk of Nitin Mohindras computer to


DFS Gandhinagar, Gujarat for forensic analysis.

26.08.2013

Special Task Force (STF) by notification was


entrusted with the investigation of all cases
relating to VYAPAM scam. A number of FIRs
were lodged by STF in cases relating to illegal
admissions/ recruitment totalling 55 cases, 45
relating to admission in professional courses and
10 relating to recruitment in government services
on recommendation of high profile persons.

16.04.2014

A set of fourteen Writ Petitions were filed before


the High Court of M.P. at Jabalpur, the lead
Petition being W.P. 15186/2013 titled Awadhesh
Prasad Shukla vs State of Madhya Pradesh
praying for transfer of investigation of VYAPAM
cases from STF to CBI. The Honble High Court
was pleased to dispose off all the Writ Petitions
with the direction of suo moto monitoring of all the
cases of VYAPAM.

July 2014

The Petitioner herein along with other persons


filed Writ Petition No.11695/2014 before the High
Court of Madhya Pradesh praying for transfer of

Investigation to CBI in light of developments that


had taken place after the order dated 16.04.2014
on basis of the chargesheet submitted by STF in
various cases relating to VYAPAM as the
investigation conducted by STF prima facie
appeared to be flawed and to shield the principal
perpetrators and prosecute the students and their
parents.
05.11.2014

The High Court of M.P. at Jabalpur was


pleased

to

dispose

of

the

Writ

Petition

11695/2014 along with others by entrusting the


supervision of STF to Special Investigation Team
(SIT) comprising of Retd. High Court Judge,
Retired IPS officer and a Technical Expert. The
Court monitoring of VYAPAM Cases was to
continue in W.P. 6385/2014. Thus a second tier of
supervision was introduced in Court monitoring
proceedings by High Court of M.P.
28.11.2014

The Petitioner along with other persons preferred


various SLPs against the order dated 05.11.2014
passed by this Honble Court being S.L.P C.C
No. 16456 of 2014,

S.L.P C.C No. 17700 of

2014, S.L.P C.C No. 17908 of 2014, S.L.P C.C


No. 31563 of 2014 were filed before this Honble

Court. This Honble Court vide Order dated


28.11.2014 dismissed the above mentioned
S.L.Ps on the statement made by the Ld.
Attorney General of India on behalf of State of
Madhya Pradesh. It is pertinent to note that this
Honble Court enlarged the jurisdiction of SIT
constituted by Honble High Court of M.P. to
supervise all the cases of STF investigation in
VYAPAM scam.
06.12.2014

The Petitioner in a representation to Special


Investigation Team, pointed out discrepancies in
the investigation conducted by STF overlooking
aspects of larger conspiracy, no investigation in
recruitment of Patwaris etc in cases involving
high profile persons. Unfortunately upto this date
no action has been taken by STF (Special task
Force) in this regard.

Dec

2014-

An External Whistle blower contacted the

January

Petitioner herein fearing for his life and limb as

2015

the Whistle blower possessed incriminating and


damaging information while working in capacity of
a technical consultant with investigating agencies
of Madhya Pradesh (Indore Police and STF). The
damaging information related to tampering of

evidence by investigating agencies to shield the


Chief Minister and other high profile persons of
Madhya Pradesh in VYAPAM scam cases relating
to recruitment examination of Samvida Shiksha
Varg-II, III and AG-III. The whistleblower provided
the hard copies of the material (with material
/mirror image of same) demonstrating tampering
undertaken by investigating agencies of Madhya
Pradesh to shield the Chief Minister and other
Ministers of the Madhya Pradesh Government.
16.02.2015

The Petitioner herein on affidavit submitted a


representation before the S.I.T. (consisting of
Honble Chairman Shri Chandresh Bhushan,
Retired Judge Madhya Pradesh High Court, Shri
Vijay Raman Retired I.P.S (Member Police) and
Shri Reddy (Member Technical) constituted on
the directions of High Court of M.P. The Petitioner
herein stated on the basis of the incriminating
material provided by the External whistleblower
that the Petitioner has original excel sheets/
materials in which C.M. was mentioned at 48
places as a middlemen/ recommender of the
candidates which was substituted with Uma
Bharti Ji, Raj Bhavan, M./s, Minister and at
other places all together deleted in excel sheet

retrieved from the deleted data of Mr. Nitin


Mohindra (Principal System Analyst; VYAPAM)
regarding

Crime

No.19-20/2013

relating

to

recruitment of Samvida Shiksha Varg-II and III.


The investigating agencies of Madhya Pradesh
have tampered with the electronic evidences and
submitted false and fabricated excel sheets in the
charge sheets filed before competent court of
law.
20.02.2015

The external whistle blower (digital forensic


engineer/ computer expert) who had worked for
S.T.F Bhopal and other investigating agencies
during the course of investigation of VYAPAM
cases filed a Writ Petition No. 334/2015 under
Article 226 r/w Article 21 of the Constitution of
India before the Honble High Court of Delhi with
following prayers:
(i) Be pleased to Direct Respondent no. 1 (State
of NCT) to provide police protection to the
Petitioner as the life and limb of the Petitioner is
under threat from highly influential persons in
Madhya Pradesh and Police authorities of
Madhya Pradesh.

(ii) Pass an order restraining the Respondent No.


2 to 4 (Madhya Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh Police
and STF) i.e. authorities of the State of Madhya
Pradesh from illegally arresting/forcibly taking the
Petitioner away from the jurisdiction of this
Honble Court.
20.02.2015

The whistle blower claimed in the petition that he


has incriminating and damaging information
regarding the involvement of Chief Minister of
Madhya Pradesh and his family members in
VYAPAM cases. The whistle blower also made a
prayer before the High Court of Delhi to submit
the original excel sheets/ material (electronic
evidence in form of soft copy) in the safe custody
of Delhi High Court. The High Court of Delhi vide
order dated 20.02.2015 passed in Writ Petition
(Crl) No. 334 of 2015 was pleased to grant him
police protection as an interim relief and directed
the police authorities of the State of Madhya
Pradesh not to remove the whistle blower from
within the territorial jurisdiction of Delhi High
Court except in accordance with procedure
established by law and without intimating the
Petitioner and his counsel on record in this
behalf.

23.02.2015

The Petitioner wrote to SIT on basis of the


material provided by the Whistle blower, in which
the Petitioner had submitted cell numbers of
prime accused of VYAPAM scam cases along
with IMEI numbers and landline/cell numbers of
Chief Minister, Chief Ministers wife and other
persons from Chief Ministers office. The call
detail records and SMSs sent between these
numbers would have corroborated that CMs
office, CM and CMs wife were in direct touch for
facilitating illegal admissions/recruitment through
VYAPAM.

But

surprisingly

the

SIT

neither

forwarded it to STF for investigation nor placed it


before Monitoring bench of High Court.
25.02.2015

The Petitioner wrote a letter to SIT Bhopal


VYAPAM cases along with the order of Delhi High
Court passed in W.P. (Crl.) No. 334/2105 filed by
the Whistleblower, requesting for convenient time
and place for presentation by the External
Whistleblower for explaining the material which
incriminate the Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh
and Chief Ministers family as the Whistleblower
was under threat of life and limb in Madhya
Pradesh.

04.03.2015

The High Court of M.P. at Jabalpur in W.P.


No. 6385/2014 (monitoring jurisdiction) was
pleased to pass an order on the grievance made
by Advocate General in context of the documents
submitted by Petitioner herein before SIT, as an
attempt to influence the SIT. The said order was
passed in absence of the Petitioner without any
notice. Further the Advocate General submitted
that what is more intriguing is that the SIT was
ready to oblige the request made in the
representations including an undertaking visit to
Delhi. The AG further submitted that the SIT is
overstepping its authority under judgment dated
05.11.2014. The High Court of M.P. (in its
monitoring jurisdiction) held that SIT could not on
its own unearth the information made available
to it, if it was in respect of investigation of the
crimes under monitoring. The High Court of
Madhya Pradesh further called for a report in
sealed cover by Chairman SIT about the
circumstances in which he accepted the request
to go to Delhi on 04.03.2015 and the purpose of
visit so made.

13.03.2015

The

whistleblower

before

submitting

the

incriminating material in a pen drive to the Delhi


High Court in W.P. (Crl.) No. 334/2015, sent the
material to Truth labs Bangalore for analysis
and veracity of the material. Truth Lab Bangalore
is a private forensic lab, credible and reputed, the
advisory board of Truth lab consists of legal
luminaries and others like :
Justice M.N. Venkatachalliah.
Justice M.Jagannadha Rao.
Justice V.S. Malimath.
Mrs

Ranjana

Kumar,

Former

Vigilance Commissioner.
Dr. Palle Ram Rao, Former
Secretary, GOI.
Mr. C.S. Rao, Former Chairman
IRDA
Mr. C. Anjaneya Reddy, Retd
IPS, Former DG Vigilance
Mr. MVS Prasad, Retd IAS,
Former Special Chief Secretary,
A.P.
Mr. Kamal Kumar Retd IPS,
Former Director NPA.
Mr. P.S.V. Prasad Retd IPS,
Former Director NPA.
Mr. Vepa Kamesam, Former DG,

RBI
Dr. Lalji Singh VC BHU & Former
Director CCMB
Mr. Potturi Venkateshwara Rao,
Former Chairman , AP Press
Academy
Prof.

T.V.

Rao

Em.Prof

IIM

Ahmedabad
Mr.

Pradeep

Mittal,

Founder

Magna Infotech, Hyderabad


18.03.2015

The External Whistleblower submitted the report


of Truth Labs Bangalore alongwith pendrive in
W.P. (Crl) No. 334/2015 in the Custody of the
High Court of Delhi.

23.03.2015

The Petitioner sent a Complaint to SIT (VYAPAM)


for registering offences and arraying the Chief
Minister and the officials of Madhya Pradesh
Police as an accused in Crime No. 19-20/2013
relating to recruitment Examination of Samvida
Shiksha Varg-II and III in light of judgment of this
Honble Court in Lalita Kumari vs State of U.P. &
Ors alongwith the certified copy of Truth lab
report and copy of the pen drive containing
incriminating

material.

A clear-cut

case

of

tampering of evidence by investigating agencies


was made out to save the Chief Minister of the
State.
26.03.2015

The Writ Petition No. 334/2015 filed by the


External whistleblower before Delhi High Court
was disposed of on the submissions made by the
Counsels with following considerations:
Counsel for STF at the outset by placing
reliance on the Counter affidavit submits
that they do not wish to interrogate the
Petitioner in the matter.
Counsel for the Petitioner in light of the
statement made at bar by the counsel
appearing on behalf of STF states that
subject to the Petitioner being provided
protection by the Police in Delhi there is
no need to proceed further with the
subject petition.

A copy of the purported material


available with the Petitioner shall be
transmitted in a sealed cover to the
Registrar General of the High Court of

Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur within a


fortnight.

The parties shall be bound by the


respective undertakings made by their
Counsel in Court today.

04.04.2015

The Petitioner herein sent a reminder letter to SIT


Vyapam cases in reference of letter dated
23.03.2015

providing

information

regarding

cognizable offences committed by Indore police


to shield the Chief Minster Madhya Pradesh. The
SIT/STF has not taken any action till date on the
information provided by the Petitioner herein in
teeth of Lalita Kumari vs State of U.P. (2014) 2
SCC 1.
08.04.2015

The STF issued an information letter/summon to


Petitioner on the representation submitted to SIT
by the Petitioner dated 06.12.2014, 15.02.2015,
25.02.2015 and 23.03.2015 for a statement.

09.04.2015

A copy of the pendrive along with the certified


copy of the report of truth lab was forwarded by
the Counsel of the whistleblower

in W.P.

334/2015 under directions of the High Court of


Delhi to Registrar General Madhya Pradesh High

Court.
15.04.2015

The Petitioner appeared before SIT VYAPAM


cases in Bhopal regarding the letter dated
08.04.2015 sent by STF. The Petitioner also
pointed

out

various

representations

and

Complaints sent by the Petitioner on which no


action was taken by either the SIT or the STF:
Representation

to

06.12.2014:

The

SIT

dated

Petitioner

pointed out discrepancies in the


investigation conducted by STF
overlooking aspects of larger
conspiracy, no investigation in
recruitment of Patwaris etc in
cases

involving

high

profile

persons.
Representation dated 16.02.2015
with affidavit of the Petitioner and
a copy of the original Excel
sheet, Petitioner informed SIT
that there is destruction/tampering
of

evidence

by

Investigating

agencies to shield the Chief

Minister

by

substituting

and

deleting CM from 48 places and


replacing

them

with

Umabharatiji,

M/s,

Rajbhawan and Minister in


excel sheet submitted in FIR 1920/2013.

Letter

dated

25.02.2015,

requesting the SIT for convenient


time and place for a presentation
to be given by the whistleblower,
explaining

the

genuineness

of

material
the

and

evidence

provided by the Petitioner. The


Advocate

General,

Madhya

Pradesh termed it as an attempt


to influence the SIT and create
avoidable confusion appearing
for

STF

in

Court

monitoring

proceedings.

Complaint of Cognizable offence


dated 23.03.2015 to SIT with a
copy to Head of STF, after the

verification

and

substantiating

tampering of evidence by Truth


Labs, Bangalore for adding name
of

additional

accused

in

the

investigation of FIR-19-20/2013
and for adding offences under
Section

201

IPC

read

with

Section 120-B against Sh. Shivraj


Singh Chauhan, Chief Minister,
Madhya

Pradesh

concerned
Police

officers

along

with

and
of

the
Indore

principal

offences. Truth Lab Bangalore


has a governing body comprising
of eminent personalities of the
nation and their credibility is
vouched for by the investigating
agencies and Superior Courts.
The expert from Truth lab is also
willing to assist the investigation if
called upon.

Further

the

information

letter/summon of STF was not as


per the procedure prescribed in

Cr.PC. The letter was not a


summon under Section 160 or
161 of CrPC after registration of a
crime and why no action has
been taken by SIT till this date on
the representations filed by the
Petitioner from time to time. The
SIT in presence of the counsels of
Petitioners candidly accepted that
they are incapacitated to go into
the facts and are helpless in the
matter.
16.04.2015

The High Court of Madhya Pradesh in its


Monitoring jurisdiction in W.P. 6385/2014 passed
an order and forwarded the documents provided
by the Counsel of the Whistleblower in W.P. (Crl)
No. 334/2014 filed before Delhi High Court to SIT
VYAPAM cases Bhopal to submit a response in
context

of

the

documents

on

or

before

23.04.2015 and fixed next date of hearing on


24.04.2015.
22.04.2015

The SIT on basis of the demonstration given by


STF staff gave a prima facie opinion that the
material appears to be forged with the intention to

mislead the investigating agency in Crime No.


539/2013 registered at Rajendra Nagar Police
Station Indore. It is submitted that the SIT made
no effort to contact the Whistleblower or the Truth
lab, Bangalore regarding the material. No effort
was made to verify the contents of pen drive by
sending it to a central forensic laboratory at
Hyderabad or Chandigarh and a prima facie
opinion was given on basis of the demonstration
of STF staff. The STF technical team is ill
equipped to deal with the forensic nuances of
evidence and the prima facie opinion is based on
their demonstration.
23.04.2015

The STF takes statement of the Petitioner in


Bhopal in relation to representations dated
06.12.2014,
23.03.2015

15.02.2015,
filed

by

25.02.2015

Petitioner

before

and
SIT

VYAPAM cases.
23.04.2015

The STF on the same day after recording the


statement of Petitioner herein issued summon to
the whistleblower in light of the statement of
Petitioner given to STF. The STF wanted to justify
its investigation in the Complaint of tampering of
evidence/Excel

Sheet

which

was

filed

as

evidence with the Charge sheet in Crime No.


19/2013 and 20/2013.
24.04.2015

The High Court of M.P. at Jabalpur in its


monitoring jurisdiction in W.P. 6385/2014 passed
an order accepting the prima facie opinion of SIT
on the demonstration given by STF staff that the
material supplied by the Whistleblower appears
to be forged in order to mislead the investigating
agencies. It is to be pointed out that the Honble
High Court of M.P. did not question the basis of
the inquiry of the SIT, as the prima facie opinion
of SIT is based on no investigation, no analysis or
evaluation by a reputed Central Forensic lab,
neither the whistleblower nor anyone from Truth
lab was called or questioned regarding the
contents.

26.04.2015

The Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh held a


press conference at his residence, and made
remarks about the Petitioner that the Petitioner
had provided forged and fabricated document to
mislead the investigation. The same was widely
reported in all the leading newspapers of the
State of Madhya Pradesh.

The said action of SIT/STF and High Court of


Madhya Pradesh regarding the material sent by
the whistleblower, and non examination of the
same without experts and behind the back of the
Petitioner herein, the whistleblower and the Truth
labs is not in judicious spirit. The same has
tarnished the impeachable reputation of the
Petitioner herein of last 30 years.
The reporting in the media and statement of the
Chief Minister in press and on television has
allegedly turned the Petitioner into someone who
had fabricated and forged evidence to mislead
the investigation.
29.06.2015

The Petitioner is approaching this Honble Court


under Article 32 read with Article 21 of the
Constitution of India as the reputation of the
Petitioner herein is at stake.
Hence the present Writ Petition

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA


CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.

OF 2015

IN THE MATTER OF:


Digvijaya Singh,
S/o Late Shri Balbhadra Singh
Aged about 67 years
R/o 64, Lodhi Estate,
Lodhi Colony,
New Delhi 110 01

...Petitioner

Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh,
Through Home Secretary,
Vallabh Bhawan,
Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh.

... Respondent No. 1

Special Investigation Team,


VYAPAM cases, Vallabh Bhawan
Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh.
3.

.... Respondent No. 2

Special Task Force,


Through ADG,
Near 7th Battalion, Jahagirabad,
Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh.

.... Respondent No. 3

AND IN THE MATTER OF:WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF


INDIA SEEKING, INTER ALIA, ISSUANCE OF WRITS, ORDERS OR
DIRECTIONS IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER
APPROPIATE WIRT QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 24.04.2015
PASSED BY THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT
JABALPUR

IN

ITS

MONITORING

JURISDICTION

IN

W.P.

6385/2014 AND THE REPORT DATED 22.04.2015 OF THE


SPECIAL INVESTIGATION TEAM (VYAPAM CASES) GIVING

PRIMA

FACIE

OPINION

THAT

THE

MATERIAL

OF

THE

WHISTLEBLOWER IS FABRICATED AND FORGED TO MISLEAD


THE INVESTIGATION AND PASS THE ORDER OF INJUNCTION
AGAINST THE NEWSPAPERS PUBLISHING NEWS/ARTICLES
AGAINST THE PETITIONER HEREIN REGARDING THE MATERIAL
SUPPLIED BY THE WHISTLEBLOWER.
To,
THE HONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA AND HIS
COMPANION JUDGES OF THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
The humble petition of the Petitioner above named:
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH: That the present Writ Petition under Article 32 of the
Constitution of India seeks the kind indulgence of this Honble
Court for the issuance of an appropriate writ order, direction, in
the form of Certiorari for quashing order dated 24.04.2015
passed by the High Court of M.P. at Jabalpur in W.P. 6385/2014
along with report dated 22.04.2015 of Special Investigation
Team VYAPAM cases giving prima facie opinion that the
material provided by the Petitioner herein is fabricated and
forged to mislead the investigation and pass for sending the
incriminating material and truth laboratory report provided by
the Petitioner for examination, analysis and authentication by a
Central forensic laboratory and for transfer of investigation of

Crime No. 539/2013 lodged at Police Station Rajendra Nagar,


District Indore and other VYAPAM scam cases for fair and
impartial investigation to CBI or any other central agency.
That the Petitioner is a law abiding citizen of India and is a
senior leader hailing from Madhya Pradesh and has been the
Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh for 10 years. Presently the
Petitioner is Member of the upper house i.e. Rajya Sabha and
has been agitating against the VYAPAM scam and the flawed
investigation by STF which is to protect the real perpetrators
(high profile persons of Madhya Pradesh) than to prosecute
them.
That this Writ Petition is filed by the Petitioner herein to
safeguard his right to reputation a fundamental right
guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India which
has been tarnished by the report dated 22.04.2015 of the
Special Investigation Team (SIT) and order dated 24.05.2015
passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur in its
Monitoring jurisdiction (W.P. 6385/2014) of VYAPAM cases. The
petitioner is canvassing the instant grievance on account of loss
of reputation, which the Petitioner had earned over a course of
40 years in service of nation and specially the State of Madhya
Pradesh. Today the allegation against the Petitioner is that he
had forged and fabricated documents to mislead the
investigation in VYAPAM scam cases.

The Respondent No.1 is the State of M.P. through Home


Secretary. State of M.P. is a necessary party in the present
Petition since the entire Vyapam scam unearthed in the said
state and the investigation is also being carried out by the STF,
which comes under the Home Department of the State of M.P..
The Respondent No. 2 is the Special Investigation Team set up
by the High Court of M.P. at Jabalpur for supervising the
investigation of the infamous vyapam scam being done by the
STF. It was the SIT who in its wisdom chose not to give an
appropriate opportunity to the Petitioner or the whistleblower to
explain to them as to how the entire excel sheet was tampered
in order to benefit a few individuals in the state of MP.
Therefore, the stand of the SIT would be important in deciding
the present case.
The Respondent No.3 is the Special Task Force. It was on the
basis of the presentation of the STF that the Special
Investigation Team (SIT) made a statement before the High
Court of M.P. at Jabalpur to the effect that the material
provided by the Petitioner herein to the SIT was forged and
fabricated. In view of the above, it would be imperative to the
have the stand of the STF on record in so far as the manner in
which they arrived at the said conclusion, in order to dispose of
the present Petition.
QUESTIONS OF LAW:

WHETHER the High Court of M.P. at Jabalpur was correct


to give a finding on fact in a monitoring jurisdiction vide order
dated 24.04.2015 on a report of SIT dated 22.04.2015 which
was based on a demonstration of staff of investigating agency,
ill trained and ill equipped to appreciate the nuances of forensic
examination?
WHETHER the High Court of M.P. at Jabalpur was correct
in passing the order dated 24.04.2015 without hearing any of
the parties involved i.e. the Petitioner herein, the whistleblower
or the representative from Truth labs Bangalore?
WHETHER the High Court of M.P. at Jabalpur was correct
in forwarding the incriminating computer/forensic material to SIT
instead of a Central forensic laboratory to check the veracity of
the material?
WHETHER an order can be passed by any judicial forum on
finding of fact against anyone without hearing them thereby
violating the principles of natural justice?
FACTS OF THE CASE: That the brief facts giving rise to the instant Writ Petition are as
follows:-

It is humbly submitted that, the Madhya Pradesh Vyavasaik


Pariksha Mandal (hereinafter shall be referred as VYAPAM)
was formed and entrusted with duty to conduct Professional
Examinations in 1970. Subsequently in 2007 VYAPAM was
also entrusted with a duty to conduct various examinations
for appointment/recruitments in Government departments
this included departments like Transport, Education, Dairy,
Wight and Measures Etc.
Thus VYAPAM became a single window for entrance in
Professional Courses as well as getting appointments in
various Government Services.

On 07.07.2013, An F.I.R being F.I.R no. 539 of 2013 was


lodged in P.S Rajendra Nagar, Indore, Madhya Pradesh
against unknown persons under Section 419,420, 467, 468
I.P.C. on complaint that certain students with false identity
cards are staying at a hotel to appear on behalf of other
candidates in PMT examination.

That on 18.07.2013 as per the charge sheet filed in Crime


No. 19-20/2013 relating to recruitment of Samvida Shiksha
Varg-II/III, the Indore police seized the office computer of
Nitin Mohindra (Principal Analyst VYAPAM; Accused) from
Bhopal VYAPAM office at 04.30 pm on 18th July 2013.
As per my information, the services of computer experts

were requisitioned by the Indore Police as well as by the


STF to assist investigation. A renowned computer expert
who has been assisting various Government departments in
data recovery was summoned and asked to recover the data
which was allegedly deleted by the writer, i.e., Mr. Nitin
Mohindra before the seizure of its hard disk on 18.07.2013.
The said computer expert succeeded in recovery of the
original data and saved a copy of the same through the help
of the software installed in the Computer. However, the
copies of the Excel Sheet filed by the STF before the High
Court of Madhya Pradesh in FIR No. 19-20/2013 contain
material

alterations,

deletions

and

substitutions,

that

tantamount to tampering with evidence which is required to


be produced before the Court of law.

As per the original deleted excel sheet retrieved by Indore


police with help of Computer Expert on 18.07.2013, CM
featured at 48 places as a recommendor/sponsorer for
candidates appearing for Samvida Shiksha Varg-II/III and
AG-III. The said specific entries were either replaced with
others like Umabharatiji, Minister, Rajbhawan and M/s
or altogether deleted. This information is authenticated and
certified by Truth labs, Bangalore, a private reputed forensic
lab in a detailed report. The aforesaid tampering of evidence
was done by Indore police, direct beneficiary being the Chief
Minister of State, Mr. Shivraj Singh Chauhan.

That on 22.07.2013 as per the charge sheet filed in Crime


No. 19-20/2013 relating to recruitment of Samvida Shiksha
Varg-II/III, the Indore police sent the hard disk of Nitin
Mohindras computer to DFS Gandhinagar, Gujarat.
That on 26.08.2013, Special Task Force (STF) by notification
was entrusted with the investigation of all cases relating to
VYAPAM scam. A number of FIRs were lodged by STF in
cases relating to illegal admissions/ recruitment totalling 55
cases, 45 relating to admission in professional courses and
10 relating to recruitment in government services on
recommendation of high profile persons.
That on 16.04.2014, a set of fourteen Writ Petitions were
filed before High Court of M.P., lead Petition being W.P.
15186/2013 titled Awadhesh Prasad Shukla vs State of
Madhya Pradesh praying for transfer of investigation of
VYAPAM cases from STF to CBI. The High Court of M.P.
was pleased to dispose off all the Writ Petitions with the
direction:

Paragraph 77
Taking overall view of the matter, therefore, as of
now, we are not inclined to accept the prayer for
transfer

of

investigation

to

other

investigation

agency. At the same time, in large public interest,

and to instill confidence in the investigation by the


STF,

we

deem

it

appropriate

to

monitor

the

investigation done by STF periodically. That will


meet the ends of justice.
Paragraph 79
Since we are disposing of all the Writ Petitions in
terms of this judgment, we deem it appropriate to
treat the question regarding Court monitoring of
investigation by STF of all the offences pertaining to
examinations conducted by VYAPAM from time to
time, as suo motu proceedings, and direct the
Registry

to

number

the

said

proceedings

accordingly, to be listed on the 25 t h April, 2014,


under Caption Director, for passing appropriate
orders.
That in July 2014 the Petitioner herein along with others filed
Writ Petition No. 11695/2014 before High Court of M.P.
praying for transfer of Investigation to CBI in light of
developments that had taken place after the order dated
16.04.2014 on basis of the charge sheet submitted by STF
in various cases relating to VYAPAM as the investigation
conducted by STF prima facie appeared to shield the
principal perpetrators and prosecute the students and their
parents.

That on 05.11.2014, High Court of M.P. was pleased to


dispose of the Writ Petitions by entrusting the supervision of
STF to Special Investigation Team. The Court monitoring of
VYAPAM Cases was to continue. Thus a second tier of
supervision was introduced in Court monitoring proceedings
by High Court of M.P.

That the Petitioner alongwith others preferred various SLPs


against the order dated 05.11.2014 passed by Honble High
Court of M.P. being S.L.P C.C No. 16456 of 2014, S.L.P C.C
No. 17700 of 2014, S.L.P C.C No. 17908 of 2014, S.L.P C.C
No. 31563 of 2014 were filed before Honble Supreme Court.
This Honble Court vide its Judgment and Order dated
28.11.2014 dismissed the above mentioned S.L.Ps on the
statement made by the Attorney General of India on behalf
of State of Madhya Pradesh. It is pertinent to note that this
Honble Court enlarged the jurisdiction of SIT constituted by
High Court of M.P. to supervise all the cases of STF
investigation in VYAPAM scam.
That on 06.12.2014, the Petitioner in a representation to the
Special Investigation Team, pointed out discrepancies in the
investigation conducted by STF overlooking aspects of
larger conspiracy, no investigation in recruitment of
Patwaris etc in cases involving high profile persons.
Unfortunately to this date no action has been taken by STF

(Special task Force) in this regard. A copy of the


representation dated 06.12.2014 by the Petitioner is
annexed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE P-1 (Pgs ___
to ___).
That in the meanwhile in December 2014-January 2015 an
External Whistle blower contacted the Petitioner herein
fearing for his life and limb as the Whistle blower possessed
incriminating and damaging information while working in
capacity of a technical consultant with investigating agencies
of Madhya Pradesh (Indore Police and STF). The damaging
information contained tampering of evidence by investigating
agencies to shield the Chief Minister and other high profile
persons of Madhya Pradesh in VYAPAM scam cases relating
to recruitment examination of Samvida Shiksha Varg-II, III
and AG-III. The whistleblower provided the hard copies of
the

material

demonstrating

(with

material

tampering

/mirror

undertaken

image
by

of

same)

investigating

agencies of Madhya Pradesh to shield the Chief Minister and


other Ministers of the Madhya Pradesh Government.
That on 16.02.2015, the Petitioner herein on affidavit
submitted a representation before the S.I.T. (consisting of
Honble Chairman Shri Chandresh Bhushan, Retired
Judge Madhya Pradesh High Court, Shri Vijay Raman
Retired I.P.S (Member Police) and Shri Reddy (Member
Technical) constituted on the directions of this Honble Court.

The Petitioner herein stated on basis of the incriminating


material provided by the External whistleblower that the
Petitioner has original excel sheets/ materials in which
C.M. was mentioned at 48 places as a middlemen/
recommender of the candidates which was substituted with
Uma Bharti Ji, Raj Bhavan, M./s, Minister. and at other
places all together deleted in excel sheet retrieved from the
deleted data of Mr. Nitin Mohindra (Principal System Analyst;
VYAPAM)

regarding

Crime

No.19-20/2013

relating

to

recruitment of Samvida Shiksha Varg-II and III . The


investigating agencies of Madhya Pradesh have tampered
with the electronic evidences and submitted false and
fabricated excel sheets in the charge sheets filed before
competent court of law. A copy of the Representation along
with Affidavit of the Petitioner dated 16.02.2015 sent by the
Petitioner to the SIT is annexed herewith and marked as
ANNEXURE P-2. (Pgs ___to ___).
That the external whistle blower (digital forensic engineer/
computer expert) who had worked for S.T.F Bhopal and
other

investigating

agencies

during

the

course

of

investigation of VYAPAM cases filed a Writ Petition (Crl)No.


334/2015 under Article 226 r/w Article 21 of the Constitution
of India before the High Court of Delhi with following prayers:

(i) Be pleased to Direct Respondent no. 1 (State of NCT) to

provide police protection to the Petitioner as the life and limb


of the Petitioner is under threat from highly influential
persons in Madhya Pradesh and Police authorities of
Madhya Pradesh.
(ii) Pass an order restraining the Respondent No. 2 to 4
(Madhya Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh Police and STF) i.e.
authorities of the State of Madhya Pradesh from illegally
arresting/forcibly taking the Petitioner away from the
jurisdiction of this Honble Court.
The whistle blower claimed in the petition that he has
incriminating and damaging information regarding the
involvement of Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh and his
family members in VYAPAM cases. The whistleblower also
made a prayer before the High Court of Delhi to submit the
original excel sheets/ material (electronic evidence in form of
soft copy) in the safe custody of Delhi High Court. The High
Court of Delhi vide order dated 20.02.2015 passed in Writ
Petition (Crl) No. 334 of 2015 was pleased to grant him
police protection as an interim relief and directed the police
authorities of the State of Madhya Pradesh not to remove
the whistle blower from within the territorial jurisdiction of
Delhi High Court except in accordance with procedure
established by law and without intimating the Petitioner and
his counsel on record in this behalf. A copy of the WP (Crl)
No. 334/2015 dated 19.2.2015 filed before the Delhi High

Court is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE P-3. (Pgs ___ to


___)
A copy of the Order dated 20.02.2015 passed by the Delhi
High Court in W.P. (Crl) No. 334/2015 is annexed herewith
and marked as ANNEXURE P-4. (Pgs ___ to ___)
That on 23.02.2015, the Petitioner wrote to SIT on basis of
the material provided by the Whistle blower, in which the
Petitioner had submitted cell numbers of prime accused of
VYAPAM scam cases along with IMEI numbers and
landline/cell numbers of Chief Minister, Chief Ministers wife
and other persons from Chief Ministers office. The call detail
records and SMSs sent between these numbers would have
corroborated that CMs office, CM and CMs wife were in
direct touch for facilitating illegal admissions/recruitment
through VYAPAM. But surprisingly the SIT did not forward it
to STF for investigation nor placed it before Monitoring
Court. A copy of the Representation of the Petitioner to the
SIT dated 23.02.2015 is annexed herewith and marked as
ANNEXURE P-5. (Pgs ___ to ___)
The Petitioner wrote a letter on 25.02.2015 to SIT Bhopal
VYAPAM cases along with the order of Delhi High Court
passed in W.P. 334/2105 filed by the Whistleblower,
requesting for convenient time and place for presentation by
the External Whistleblower for explaining the material which

incriminate the Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh and Chief


Ministers family as the Whistleblower was under threat of
life and limb in Madhya

Pradesh. A copy of

the

Representation dated 25.02.2015 of the Petitioner is


annexed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE P-6. (Pgs
___ to ___)
That on 04.03.2015 the High Court of M.P. at Jabalpur
in W.P. No. 6385/2014 (monitoring jurisdiction) was pleased
to pass an order on the grievance made by Advocate
General in context of the documents submitted by Petitioner
herein before SIT, as an attempt to influence the SIT. The
said order was passed in absence of the Petitioner without
any notice. Further the Advocate General submitted that
what is more intriguing is that the SIT was ready to oblige the
request

made

in

the

representations

including

by

undertaking visit to Delhi. That SIT is overstepping its


authority under judgment dated 05.11.2014. The High
Court of M.P. at Jabalpur held that SIT could not on its
own unearth the information made available to it, if it was in
respect of investigation of the crimes under monitoring. The
High Court further called for a report in sealed cover by
Chairman SIT about the circumstances in which he accepted
the request to go to Delhi on 04.03.2015 and the purpose of
visit so made. A copy of the Order date 04.03.2015 in WP
No. 6385 of 2014 passed by the High Court of M.P. at
Jabalpur is annexed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE

P-7 (Pgs ___ to ___).


That on 13.03.2015, the whistleblower before submitting the
incriminating material in a pen drive to the Delhi High Court
in W.P. Crl. No. 334/2015, sends the material to truth labs
Bangalore for analysis and veracity of the material. Truth Lab
Bangalore is a

private forensic lab, credible and reputed, the advisory board


of Truth lab consists of legal luminaries and others like :
Justice M.N. Venkatachalliah.
Justice M.Jagannadha Rao.
Justice V.S. Malimath.
Mrs Ranjana Kumar, Former Vigilance Commissioner.
Dr. Palle Ram Rao, Former Secretary, GOI.
Mr. C.S. Rao, Former Chairman IRDA
Mr. C. Anjaneya Reddy, Retd IPS, Former DG Vigilance
Mr. MVS Prasad, Retd IAS, Former Special Chief Secretary,
A.P.
Mr. Kamal Kumar Retd IPS, Former Director NPA.
Mr. P.S.V. Prasad Retd IPS, Former Director NPA.
Mr. Vepa Kamesam, Former DG, RBI
Dr. Lalji Singh VC BHU & Former Director CCMB
Mr. Potturi Venkateshwara Rao, Former Chairman , AP
Press Academy

Prof. T.V. Rao Em.Prof IIM Ahmedabad


Mr. Pradeep Mittal, Founder Magna Infootech, Hyderabad
That on 18.03.2015, the External Whistleblower submitted
the report of Truth Labs Bangalore alongwith pendrive in
W.P. (Crl) No. 334/2015 in the Custody of the High Court of
Delhi. A copy of the report of Truth Lab, Bangalore dated
18.3.2015 is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure P8. (Pages_____to_____)

That on 23.03.2015, the Petitioner sent a Complaint to SIT


(VYAPAM) cases for registering offences and arraying the
Chief Minister and the officials of Madhya Pradesh Police as
an accused in Crime No. 19-20/2013 relating to recruitment
Examination of Samvida Shiksha Varg-II and III in light of
judgment of this Honble Court in Lalita Kumari vs State of
U.P. & Ors alongwith the certified copy of Truth lab report
and copy of the pen drive containing incriminating material. A
clear cut case of tampering of evidence by investigating
agencies was made out to save the Chief Minister of the
State. A copy of the Complaint of the Petitioner to the SIT
dated 23.03.2015 is annexed herewith and marked as
ANNEXURE P-9. (Pgs ___ to ___).
That on 26.03.2015, the Writ Petition No. 334/2015 filed by
the External whistleblower before Delhi High Court was
disposed of on the submissions made by the Counsels with

following considerations:

Counsel for STF at the outset by placing reliance on the


Counter affidavit submits that they do not wish to interrogate
the Petitioner in the matter.

Counsel for the Petitioner in light of the statement made at


bar by the counsel appearing on behalf of STF states that
subject to the Petitioner being provided protection by the
Police in Delhi there is no need to proceed further with the
subject petition.

A copy of the purported material available with the Petitioner


shall be transmitted in a sealed cover to the Registrar
General of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur
within a fortnight.

The parties shall be bound by the respective undertakings


made by their Counsel in Court today.

A copy of the Order dated 26.03.2015 passed by the Delhi


High Court in W.P. (Crl) No. 334 of 2015 is annexed herewith
and marked as ANNEXURE P-10. (Pages_____to_____)

That on 04.04.2015, the Petitioner herein sent a reminder


letter to SIT Vyapam cases in reference of letter dated
23.03.2015 providing information regarding cognizable
offences conducted by Indore police to shield the Chief
Minster Madhya Pradesh. That the SIT/STF has not taken
any action till date on the information provided by the
Petitioner herein in teeth of Lalita Kumari vs State of U.P.
(2014) 2 SCC 1. A copy of the Reminder letter sent by the
Petitioner dated 04.04.2015 is annexed herewith and
marked as Annexure P-11. (Pages_____to_____)

That on 08.04.2015, The STF issued an information


letter/summon to Petitioner on the representation submitted
to SIT by the Petitioner dated 06.12.2014, 15.02.2015,
25.02.2015 and 23.03.2015 for a statement.
That on 09.04.2015, a copy of the pendrive along with the
certified copy of the report of truth lab was forwarded by the
Counsel of the whistleblower in W.P. (Crl) No. 334/2015
under directions of the High Court of Delhi to Registrar
General Madhya Pradesh High Court.
That on 15.04.2015, the Petitioner appeared before SIT
VYAPAM cases in Bhopal regarding the letter dated
08.04.2015 sent by STF. The Petitioner also pointed out
various representations and Complaints sent by the
Petitioner on which no action was taken by either the SIT or

the STF:
Representation to SIT dated 06.12.2014: the Petitioner
pointed out discrepancies in the investigation conducted by
STF

overlooking

aspects

of

larger

conspiracy,

no

investigation in recruitment of Patwaris etc in cases involving


high profile persons.
Representation dated 16.02.2015 with affidavit of the
Petitioner and a copy of the original Excel sheet, Petitioner
informed SIT that there is destruction/tampering of evidence
by Investigating agencies to shield the Chief Minister by
substituting and deleting CM from 48 places and replacing
them with Umabharatiji, M/s, Rajbhawan and Minister
in excel sheet submitted in FIR 19-20/2013.

Letter dated 25.02.2015, requesting the SIT for convenient


time and place for a presentation to be given by the
whistleblower, explaining the material and genuineness of
the evidence provided by the Petitioner. The Advocate
General, Madhya Pradesh termed it as an attempt to
influence the SIT and create avoidable confusion appearing
for STF in Court monitoring proceedings.

Complaint of Cognizable offence dated 23.03.2015 to SIT


with a copy to Head of STF, after the verification and
substantiating tampering of evidence by Truth Labs,

Bangalore for adding name of additional accused in the


investigation of FIR-19-20/2013 and for adding offences
under Section 201 IPC read with Section 120-B against Sh.
Shivraj Singh Chauhan, Chief Minister, Madhya Pradesh and
the concerned officers of Indore Police along with principal
offences. Truth Lab Bangalore has a governing body
comprising of eminent personalities of the nation and their
credibility is vouched for by the investigating agencies and
Superior Courts. The expert from Truth lab is also willing to
assist the investigation if called upon.
Further the information letter/summon of STF was not as per
the procedure prescribed in CrPC. The letter was not a
summon under Section 160 or 161 of CrPC after registration
of a crime and why no action has been taken by SIT till this
date on the representations filed by the Petitioner from time
to time. The SIT in presence of the counsels of Petitioners
candidly accepted that they are incapacitated to go into the
facts and are helpless in the matter.
That on 16.04.2015, the High Court of M.P. at Jabalpur
in its Monitoring jurisdiction in W.P. 6385/2014 passed an
order and forwarded the documents provided by the Counsel
of the Whistleblower in W.P. (Crl) No. 334/2014 filed before
Delhi High Court to SIT VYAPAM cases Bhopal to submit a
response in context of the documents on or before
23.04.2015 and fixed next date of hearing on 24.04.2015. A

copy of Order dated 16.04.2015 of the High Court of Madhya


Pradesh at Jabalpur in W.P. 6385/2014 is annexed herewith
and marked as Annexure P-12. (Pgs ___ to ___)
That on 22.04.2015, the SIT on basis of the demonstration
given by STF staff gave a prima facie opinion that the
material appears to be forged with the intention to mislead
the investigating agency in Crime No. 539/2013 registered at
Rajendra Nagar Police Station Indore. It is submitted that the
SIT made no effort to contact the Whistleblower or the Truth
lab, Bangalore regarding the material. No effort was made to
verify the contents of pen drive by sending it to a central
forensic laboratory at Hyderabad or Chandigarh and a prima
facie opinion was given on basis of the demonstration of
STF staff. The STF technical team is ill equipped to deal with
the forensic nuances of evidence and the prima facie opinion
is based on their demonstration.

That on 23.04.2015 The STF takes statement of the


Petitioner in Bhopal in relation to representations dated
06.12.2014, 15.02.2015, 25.02.2015 and 23.03.2015 filed by
Petitioner before SIT VYAPAM cases.
That on 23.04.2015, the STF on the same day after taking
statement of Petitioner herein issues summon to the
whistleblower in light of the statement of Petitioner given to

STF. The STF wanted to justify its investigation in the


Complaint of tampering of evidence/Excel Sheet which was
filed as evidence with the Charge sheet in Crime No.
19/2013 and 20/2013.
That on 24.04.2015, the High Court of M.P. at Jabalpur
in its monitoring jurisdiction in W.P. 6385/2014 passed an
order accepting the prima facie opinion of SIT on the
demonstration given by STF staff that the material supplied
by the Whistleblower appears to be forged in order to
mislead the investigating agencies. It is to be pointed out
that the High Court of M.P. did not question the basis of the
inquiry of the SIT, as the prima facie opinion of SIT is based
on no investigation, no analysis or evaluation by a reputed
Central Forensic lab, neither the whistleblower nor anyone
from Truth lab was called or questioned regarding the
contents. A copy of the Order dated 24.04.2015 of the High
Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur in W.P. 6385/2014 is
annexed herewith and marked as Annexure P-13. (pgs ___
to ___)
That on 26.04.2015, the Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh
held a press conference at his residence, and made remarks
about the Petitioner that the Petitioner had provided forged
and fabricated document to mislead the investigation. The
same was widely reported in all the newspapers of Madhya
Pradesh.

That, the Petitioner submitted a letter dated 27.04.2015


apropos to the report of SIT to the High Court of M.P. at
Jabalpur qua prima facie opinion that the contents of pen
drive submitted by the Whistleblower appears to be the
forged with an intent to mislead investigation the petitioner
herein submitted a detailed letter expressing/ highlighting
discrepancies which were overlooked by the SIT. A copy of
the Letter dated 27.04.2015 of the Petitioner is annexed
herewith and marked as Annexure P-14. (Pgs ___ to ___)
That the present Petitioner has not filed any other Petition in
any High Court or the Supreme Court of India or in any other
court on the subject matter of the instant Petition and if the
reliefs as prayed for him are granted, the petitioners redressal
will be complete, effectual and will meet the ends of the justice.
The source of knowledge of the facts as alleged in the present
writ petition are self-enquiry, records of Court proceedings,
reports and newspaper articles.

GROUNDS
FOR THAT the authenticity of the material provided by
the whistleblower could have been examined and
evaluated

only

by

specialised

Central

forensic

laboratory as the STF staff is not trained and ill


equipped to give an opinion on the forensic nuances of

electronic evidence and on the veracity of the material .


FOR THAT the SIT and High Court did not call upon
either the whistleblower or the representative of truth
lab Bangalore to ascertain the authenticity of the
material or the examination conducted by truth labs to
come to the conclusion that the material/excel sheet
which is part of the charge sheet filed in Crime No.
19/2013 and Crime No. 20/2013 is a tampered one.
FOR THAT the Petitioner was not called upon by the SIT after
the Petitioner had submitted the certified report of truth lab and
pen

drive

of

the

whistleblower

vide

Complaint

dated

23.03.2015. No action was taken by the SIT on any of the


representations submitted by the Petitioner.
FOR THAT the report dated 22.04.2015 and order
dated 24.04.2015 passed by the High Court of M.P. at
Jabalpur was prepared and passed respectively in
absence of the Petitioner herein.
FOR THAT the High Court of M.P. at Jabalpur in its
Monitoring jurisdiction has given prima facie finding of
fact

regarding

the

authenticity

of

the

material

submitted by the whistleblower without any application


of mind and on basis of a report submitted by SIT.
FOR THAT the order of the High Court of M.P. at

Jabalpur in its monitoring jurisdiction on finding of fact


will subvert any investigation which the investigation
agency might have undertaken regarding tampering of
evidence by Indore police and beneficiary being the
Chief Minister.
FOR THAT just after the order passed by the High
Court of M.P. at Jabalpur in its monitoring jurisdiction
regarding finding of fact, the Chief Minister held a
press conference, at his residence, which was reported
in various newspapers. The Chief Minister rejoicing
and elated that a clean chit has been given by High
Court and the Petitioner has fabricated and forged
documents to mislead investigation.
FOR THAT the actions of SIT, High Court of M.P. and
the press conference of the Chief Minister has caused
loss

of

reputation

to

the

Petitioner

which

is

fundamental right under the constitution of India. At


present the Petitioner who has held high public offices
and had been in service of people of Madhya Pradesh
is being projected as someone who has forged and
fabricated evidence.
FOR THAT the prima facie opinion of SIT is based on
the demonstration given by STF (technical staff), which
is not a forensic laboratory.

FOR THAT instead of submitting the material provided


by the whistleblower to a reputed central laboratory for
examination and opinion the SIT and the STF itself
adorned the mantle of a forensic laboratory and gave a
prima facie opinion that the material is forged and
fabricated.

FOR THAT the High Court of M.P. at Jabalpur instead


of taking a stern view on the report of SIT which stems
from

demonstration

of

incompetent

STF

staff

accepted the prima facie opinion of the SIT.


FOR THAT the newspapers are flooded with the
statements of Chief Minister that the Petitioner herein
had

submitted

forged

excel

sheet

to

mislead

investigation.

P R AY E R
In the aforesaid facts and circumstances it is most respectfully prayed
that this Honble Court may be pleased to:
Issue an appropriate writ, order, direction, in the form or of
Certiorari or any other appropriate writ for quashing order dated
24.04.2015 passed by the High Court of M.P. at Jabalpur in
W.P. 6385/2014 and report dated 22.04.2015 of Special
Investigation Team VYAPAM cases giving prima facie opinion

that the material provided by the Petitioner herein is fabricated


and forged to mislead the investigation;
Issue or pass any writ, direction or order in the nature of
Mandamus for sending the incriminating material and truth
laboratory report provided by the Petitioner for examination,
analysis and authentication by a Central forensic laboratory;

Issue or pass any writ, direction or order in the nature of


Mandamus for transferring investigation of Crime No. 539/2013
lodged at Police Station Rajendra nagar, District Indore and
other VYAPAM scam cases for fair and impartial investigation to
CBI or any other central agency;

Issue or pass any writ, direction or order that this Honble Court
may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of
the case.

AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS THE PETITIONER AS IN DUTY


BOUND SHALL EVER PRAY

DRAWN BY:
DRAWN ON:
FILED ON:
NEW DELHI

RAKHI RAY
ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA


CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
I.A. NO.
OF 2015
IN

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.

OF 2015

IN THE MATTER OF:SH. DIGVIJAYA SINGH

...PETITIONER
VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

...RESPONDENTS

APPLICATION FOR AD-INTERIM EX-PARTE DIRECTIONS

To,
THE HONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA AND HIS
COMPANION JUDGES OF THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

The humble petition of the Petitioner above namedMOST RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH: That, the Petitioner is a Member of Parliament from Rajya
Sabha and had been Chief Minister of State of Madhya
Pradesh for 10 years. The Petitioner is a public figure and had
been serving the State of Madhya Pradesh for last 40 years.
As a man of impeccable integrity the Petitioner is being
subjected to humiliation as allegedly being an accomplice to
someone who had fabricated and forged evidence in
VYAPAM cases to mislead the investigation. The Petitioner is a
law abiding citizen of India.

That the instant application is being filed seeking interim orders


in respect of issue the authenticity of the material provided by
the whistleblower could have been examined and evaluated
only by a specialised Central forensic laboratory as the STF
staff is not trained and ill equipped to give an opinion on the
forensic nuances of electronic evidence and on the veracity of
the material.
That SIT and High Court of M.P. at Jabalpur did not call
upon either the whistleblower or the representative of truth lab
Bangalore to ascertain the authenticity of the material or the
examination conducted by truth labs to come to the conclusion
that the material/excel sheet which is part of the charge sheet
filed in Crime No. 19/2013 and Crime No. 20/2013 is a
tampered one.
That, the Petitioner was not called upon by the SIT after the
Petitioner had submitted the certified report of truth lab and
pen

drive

of

the

whistleblower

vide

Complaint

dated

23.03.2015. No action was taken by the SIT on any of the


representations submitted by the Petitioner.
That the report dated 22.04.2015 and order dated 24.04.2015
passed by the High Court of M.P. at Jabalpur was
prepared and passed respectively in absence of the Petitioner
herein.
That, the High Court of M.P. at Jabalpur in its Monitoring

jurisdiction has given prima facie finding of fact regarding the


authenticity of the material submitted by the whistleblower
without any application of mind and on basis of a report
submitted by SIT.
That the order of the High Court of M.P. at Jabalpur in its
monitoring jurisdiction on finding of fact will subvert any
investigation which the investigation agency might have
undertaken regarding tampering of evidence by Indore police
and beneficiary being the Chief Minister.

That just after the order passed by High Court of M.P. at


Jabalpur in its monitoring jurisdiction regarding finding of fact,
the Chief Minister held a press conference, at his residence,
which was reported in various newspapers. The Chief Minister
rejoicing and elated that a clean chit has been given by High
Court and the Petitioner has fabricated and forged documents
to mislead investigation.
That the actions of SIT, High Court of M.P. and the press
conference of the Chief Minister has caused loss of reputation
of the Petitioner which is a fundamental right under the
constitution of India. At present the Petitioner who has held
high public offices and had been in service of people of
Madhya Pradesh is being projected as someone who has
forged and fabricated evidence.

That the prima facie opinion of SIT is based on the


demonstration given by STF (technical staff), which is not a
forensic laboratory.
That the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner has a good
prima facie case and hopes to succeed before this Honble
Court.
That grave and irreparable prejudice is being caused to the
interest of the public at large with each passing day.
That the instant application is being made bona fide in the
interest of justice.

PRAYER
It is therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may
kindly be pleased to:
Stay order dated 24.04.2015 passed by High Court of M.P.
at Jabalpur in W.P. 6385/2014 and report dated 22.04.2015 of
Special Investigation Team VYAPAM cases giving prima facie
opinion that the material provided by the Petitioner herein is
fabricated and forged to mislead the investigation;
Direct, the incriminating material and truth laboratory report
provided by the Petitioner shall be sent for examination,
analysis and authentication by a Central forensic laboratory;

Direct Respondent No. 1 to transfer investigation of Crime No.


539/2013 lodged at Police Station Rajendra nagar, District
Indore and other VYAPAM scam cases for fair and impartial
investigation to CBI or any other central agency;

Pass any other or further order or directions which this Hon'ble


Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of this case.
AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS THE PETITIONER AS IN
DUTY BOUND SHALL EVER PRAY.
DRAWN BY:
DRAWN ON:
FILED ON:
NEW DELHI

RAKHI RAY
ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA


CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.
OF 2015

IN THE MATTER OF:SH. DIGVIJAYA SINGH

...PETITIONER
VERSUS

STATE OF M.P. & OTHERS

I.A. NO.

OF 2015

...RESPONDENTS

APPLICATION FOR AD-INTERIM


EX-PARTE DIRECTIONS

PAPERBOOK
[FOR INDEX KINDLY SEE INSIDE]
ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER: MRS. RAKHI RAY