High CourtsSingal Bench

Manju Devi vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 10 December 2018 · Citation: (2018) 12 RAJ CK 0276

HON’BLE JUDGES
Pankaj Bhandari, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 — Section 38
RESULT
Disposed Off
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Writ No. 797 Of 2018
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 358 words
1.

Petitioner has preferred this writ petition with a prayer for quashing the F.I.R. No.40/2018 and with a further prayer of quashing charge-sheet Bearing No.147/2018.

2.

It is contended by counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is an elected Sarpanch whose term is till January, 2019. If the charge-sheet is not quashed, she would be suspended. It is also contended that any disqualification relating to election can be challenged only in an election petition. It is further contended that the dispute with regard to submission of forged mark-sheet is pending before the Government and police was not entitled to investigate the same, as the complaint was filed at the behest of the persons who have political rivalry with the petitioner.

3.

Counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on "Smt. Samira Bano vs State & Ors." 2007 (2) WLC (Raj.) 526, wherein the Rajasthan High Court has held that pre-election disqualification can be adjudicated only in an election petition. It is also contended that as per Section 38 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, procedure of removal and suspension is codified but the general trend is that whenever cognizance is taken by a Court, the State Government suspends the Panch or Sarpanch.

4.

I have considered the contentions and perused the chargesheet filed by the police.

5.

Police after due investigation and after recording the statement of the Principal of the School and after collecting the relevant record has come to the conclusion that the petitioner never studied in that school and the certificate is forged.

6.

In view of the fact that the allegation against the petitioner is of contesting the elections by submitting forged eighth class certificate and police has come to the conclusion that petitioner has committed the offence, the judgment cited by the petitioner would have no applicability. The criminal proceedings have nothing to do with an election petition, if forgery is committed. Police is empowered to conduct investigation and submit charge-sheet if the offence is made out.

7.

No ground is made out for quashing the F.I.R. and the charge-sheet Hence the writ petition is dismissed. Stay petition also stands disposed.