High Court Division
Mohammad Obaidullah v The State and another
Criminal Appeal(H) 8058/2024 · Appeal allowed; conviction set aside · Decided 10 September 2026
The appellant, appointed as a Lower Assistant at the National University, Gazipur and later promoted to Higher Assistant, was convicted by the Divisional Special Judge, Dhaka under sections 467, 468, 471 and 420 of the Penal Code and sentenced to four years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Tk 20,000. The prosecution alleged that, taking advantage of a similar name, he had submitted another person's degree (pass) certificate to obtain employment. He had earlier been dismissed from service in a departmental proceeding on the same allegation. Twelve prosecution witnesses were examined, and the defence had no chance to cross-examine them because of the appellant's absence. On appeal, the High Court Division noted that the university's service rules required only an HSC qualification for the posts he held, and that the original certificate had not been produced before the trial court. It observed that the result of a departmental proceeding cannot be taken into consideration in a criminal proceeding. Finding merit in the appeal, it set aside the conviction.
- Whether a conviction for forgery and cheating based on an allegedly false degree certificate could stand where the original certificate was not produced and the posts held did not require a degree.
- Whether a finding of guilt in a departmental proceeding can establish criminal liability.
- The result of a departmental proceeding cannot be taken into consideration in a criminal proceeding; unless the alleged act constitutes a criminal offence, a departmental finding cannot establish criminal liability.
- As the National University service rules did not require a degree (pass) certificate for appointment as Lower Assistant or promotion to Higher Assistant, convicting the appellant on the basis of the alleged degree certificate was unjustified.
- The original certificate had not been produced before the trial court, and the certificate form had no field for the examinee's father's name, which left unexplained how the father's name was shown to differ.
- The appeal was allowed and the judgment and order of conviction passed by the Divisional Special Judge was set aside.
Though the convict-appellant was found guilty in the departmental proceeding for submitting the forged degree (pass) certificate at the time of joining the service but the result of the departmental proceeding cannot be taken into consideration in the criminal proceeding.
