Mr. Sukhbir Singh Badal and Late Mr. Prakash Singh Badal, who were summoned in relation to criminal proceedings under Sections 420, 465, 466, 467, 468, and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, have been exonerated by the Supreme Court. The criminal proceedings against the appellants were related to allegations of false representation concerning the Shiromani Akali Dal (Badal) political party registration.
Brief Facts of the Case:
An appeal has been submitted challenging the High Court of Punjab and Haryana's dismissal of an application that aimed to invalidate a summoning order issued by the learned Trial Court against the accused/appellant. The summoning order was related to Sections 420, 465, 466, 467, 468, and 471 of the Indian Penal Code and any additional proceedings that may have emerged from it. Nonetheless, the High Court rejected the application.
Brief Background of the Case:
The respondent/complainant initially brought a complaint against four individuals, namely Mr. Sukhbir Singh Badal, Mr. Sukhdev Singh Dhindsa, Mr. Surinder Singh Shinda, and Dr. Daljit Singh Cheema, accusing them of various offences under the Indian Penal Code. The respondent claimed that the affidavit submitted to the Election Commission of India contradicted the one submitted to the Gurudwara Election Commission and that the Shiromani Akali Dal had submitted a false Constitution to the Election Commission of India to obtain recognition as a political party.
The Trial Court investigated Section 202 of the Criminal Procedure Code and recorded witness statements. The respondent filed an application with the court requesting that two of the appellants be summoned as witnesses, which was granted. However, the respondent later submitted another application stating that he did not wish to pursue the case against them. The appellants subsequently filed a revision application with the High Court to dismiss the summons for witnesses, which was granted.
The inquiry then proceeded, and evidence was gathered. After nine years, the respondent filed an amendment application seeking to make significant changes to the complaint, including adding five more individuals as accused and adding specific offences to the complaint. Shri Parkash Singh Badal was included as an accused in the proposed amendment. However, the Trial Court dismissed the amendment application, and the respondent appealed the decision to the High Court, which was later withdrawn.
Contentions of the Appellants (Accused in the Original Suit):
The appellants contended that the respondent's complaint was an abuse of the legal system and the Court and argued that the High Court should have quashed the criminal proceedings arising from it. They claimed that the complaint was filed 20 years after the party's registration and only after the respondent failed to get the party's registration cancelled. The appellants also argued that the clauses in the party's constitution did not conflict with the requirements of Section 29-A of the Representation of People Act of 1951, which stipulates that a political party's memorandum seeking registration must demonstrate true faith and allegiance to the principles of socialism, secularism, and democracy.
The appellants further argued that managing a religious place is a secular act and that participating in elections for Shiromani Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee is not a non-secular act. They also asserted that being religious is not contradictory to secularism and that it is possible to be both religious and secular in outlook. The appellants claimed that the trial court had summoned the appellants to face trial without making out a case for the offences alleged. They argued that the ingredients for the offence of cheating were not established, and even the offence of forgery had not been proven.
Contentions of the Respondents (Complainant in the Original Suit):
The respondents argued that the accused had submitted a false Constitution to obtain registration for their political party, committing the offences of fraud, forgery, and cheating. The eligibility criteria for the election and the undertakings before the Election Commission of India and Gurdwara Election Commission were contradictory, and the Constitution was falsely claimed to be secular. Witnesses and evidence established the continuing nature of fraud and the roles of the appellants. The counsel argued that a prima facie case was made against the accused and that the summoning order should stand. The counsel also contended that the case involved serious fraud, forgery, and cheating, and the evidence supported the accusation against the accused.
The decision of the Court:
The Supreme Court reviewed the registration application of Shiromani Akali Dal (Badal) under Section 29-A of the Representation of People Act of 1951, which required a political party to comply with secularism and socialism. The Party had adopted a Memorandum to that effect, but no other "Rules or Regulations" were submitted. The court ruled that the ingredients for the offence of cheating were not met, and no case was made under Section 420 Indian Penal Code. Also, no false document was produced, which was essential for the offence of forgery under Section 465. Besides, no case was established for the offences under Sections 466, 467, and 468 Indian Penal Code, and even assuming the respondent's allegations to be accurate, the ingredients of the offence punishable under Sections 420, 465, 466, 467, 468, 471 Indian Penal Code were not established. Therefore, the criminal proceedings against the appellants were an abuse of the process of law and court, and the entire criminal proceedings were quashed.
Case Title: Shri Sukhbir Singh Badal v Balwant Singh Khera and Ors.
Case No.: Criminal Appeal No. 1116 of 2023
Citation: 2023 Latest Caselaw 417 SC
Coram: Hon’ble Mr Justice M.R Shah and Hon’ble Mr. Justice C.T Ravikumar
Advocates for Appellant: Mr K.V. Viswanathan Sr Adv.
Advocates for Respondent: Mr. C.U. Singh Sr. Adv. and Mr. Prashant Bhushan Adv.
Read Judgement @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
