A serious legal matter has come to light in Dima Hasao district after a First Information Report (FIR) was filed against a senior official of the North Cachar Hills Autonomous Council (NCHAC). The FIR was registered at Haflong Police Station against Shri Uttam Daolagupu, who is the Revenue Secretary (In-Charge) of the council.
The case relates to allegations of forgery, fabrication of false evidence and the use of forged documents in judicial proceedings, raising questions about the handling of official land records and the manner in which documents were presented before the court.
According to the FIR, a letter dated December 10, 1998, was allegedly forged and later used to claim that around 6,000 bighas of land at Umrangso had been allotted to the Industry Department. The complainants have stated that this document was not genuine and that it was submitted before the Hon’ble Gauhati High Court as part of an official submission. 
The complaint further alleges that the disputed letter was annexed to an Additional Affidavit-in-Opposition filed in court and was presented as an authentic official record. It is claimed that the document was used with the intention of misleading the court and strengthening a false claim regarding land allotment.
Based on these allegations, the FIR invokes serious provisions of the Indian Penal Code, including Sections 340, 471 and 420. These sections relate to offences involving false evidence, using forged documents as genuine, and cheating. If proven, the charges could attract significant legal consequences.
A key aspect of the case is the sworn statements submitted by former senior functionaries of the NCHAC. These include affidavits from an Ex-Chief Executive Member and a former Executive Member (Revenue) of the council. Both have reportedly denied the authenticity of the 1998 letter.
In their affidavits, the former officials have stated that no such land allotment was ever made and that the signatures appearing on the document are not genuine. They have categorically denied issuing or approving any letter related to the alleged allotment of 6,000 bighas of land to the Industry Department at Umrangso.
The complainants have argued that these sworn statements clearly establish that the document in question was fabricated. They have also pointed out that the accused, being the custodian of official land records, held a position of trust and responsibility. According to the complaint, the act either involved direct preparation of a false document or the conscious use of a forged record while fully aware of its falsity.
The FIR also refers to a landmark judgment of the Supreme Court in Iqbal Singh Marwah vs. Meenakshi Marwah (2005). Citing this ruling, the complainants have stated that a police investigation is legally permissible in this case, as the alleged act of forgery took place prior to the document being produced before the court. The judgment clarifies that criminal proceedings can be initiated independently when the offence of forgery precedes judicial proceedings.
