Archive · 18 Sep 2026
Madhya Pradesh High Court Quashes Teacher’s Cheating FIR
A newspaper report said that someone else might be teaching instead of teacher Roop Singh Chadar.
Officials inspected the school and an FIR was filed against him for cheating.
The education department also held an internal investigation.
That investigation found that the main accusation was not proved.
Even so, Chadar’s employment was later terminated because a criminal case was pending.
Chadar asked the Madhya Pradesh High Court to cancel the criminal case.
The court said the accusation might be a work-related discipline issue, but it did not contain the parts needed to prove cheating.
The court therefore cancelled the FIR and said keeping the case going would be unfair and unnecessary.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court quashed a cheating FIR against government teacher Roop Singh Chadar.
The case began after a November 18, 2024 newspaper report alleged another person taught in Chadar’s place.
A departmental inquiry found the main allegation involving Vikram Singh Lodhi was not proved.
The court said the allegations did not show deception, dishonest inducement, or delivery of property required for cheating.
The state argued the FIR disclosed a cognisable offence, but the court ruled that continuing the case would abuse the legal process.
- Who
- Government school teacher Roop Singh Chadar, Vikram Singh Lodhi, the Madhya Pradesh government, and the Madhya Pradesh High Court led by Justice Himanshu Joshi.
- What
- The High Court quashed a cheating FIR against Chadar after finding that the allegations did not establish the legal ingredients of cheating.
- When
- The newspaper report and suspension occurred on November 18, 2024; the FIR was registered on November 19, 2024; Chadar’s termination order was dated June 4, 2025; the court’s order was issued on September 11.
- Where
- Malthon, Madhya Pradesh.
- Why
- The court found no allegation of deception, fraudulent representation, dishonest inducement, or delivery of property attributable to Chadar, and noted that the principal departmental allegation was not proved.
Teacher’s Position
State’s Position
Whether the FIR should continue
Teacher’s Position
Chadar argued that the central allegation had not been proved in the departmental inquiry, so continuing the criminal case would abuse the process of law.
State’s Position
The state argued that the FIR disclosed a cognisable offence requiring investigation and that the High Court should not assess evidence at that stage.
Effect of departmental exoneration
Teacher’s Position
Chadar relied on his exoneration from the principal allegation as a reason to quash the criminal proceedings.
State’s Position
The state argued that departmental and criminal proceedings operate separately and that departmental exoneration does not automatically require quashing a criminal case.
Nature of the alleged conduct
Teacher’s Position
The court accepted that, at most, the allegations could concern service misconduct rather than cheating.
State’s Position
The state maintained that the allegations were sufficient to support investigation of a cognisable criminal offence.
- Petitioner
- Roop Singh Chadar, a government school teacher
- Alleged substitute teacher
- Vikram Singh Lodhi
- Newspaper report
- November 18, 2024
- FIR registration
- November 19, 2024
- Departmental finding
- The allegation that Lodhi taught in Chadar’s place was found not proved
- Termination order
- June 4, 2025
- Court
- Madhya Pradesh High Court