Proxy Teaching Allegation May Be Service Misconduct, Not Cheating Without Deception or Inducement: MP High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has quashed a cheating FIR against a government teacher accused of using another person to perform his teaching duties, holding that the allegation did not disclose the statutory ingredients of cheating.

Background

The case began after a newspaper report alleged proxy teaching. An inspection allegedly found another person performing the applicant's duties, leading to suspension, departmental action and a criminal case.

Legal issue and Court's reasoning

The High Court separated possible service misconduct from criminal cheating. Section 318(4) BNS requires deception, dishonest inducement and a resulting delivery of property or wrongful gain. The FIR did not attribute any such inducement, fraudulent representation or property delivery to the teacher.

The Court also noted that the core substitution charge was not established in the departmental inquiry. Although disciplinary and criminal proceedings apply different standards, that finding substantially weakened the factual foundation on which the FIR had been registered.

Result and practical consequence

Relying on the principles governing quashing where allegations do not constitute an offence even if accepted at face value, the Court found continuation of prosecution unjustified.

The FIR was quashed and the petition allowed.