| Headnote |
Representation of People Act, 1951 – s. 29-A(5) – SikhGurudwaras Act, 1925 – Penal Code, 1860 – ss. 420, 463, 465,466, 467, 468, 471 r/w s. 120B, 191, 192 – Code of CriminalProcedure, 1973 – ss. 202, 204, 315, 482 – A private complaintwas filed by the respondent no.1-original complainant u/ss. 463,465, 466, 467, 468, 471, 191, 192 of IPC against the appellants –It was alleged in the complaint that while complying with therequirements of s.29-A(5) of the Representation of People Act, 1951an affidavit was filed before the Election Commission of India (ECI),which conflicted with the af fidavit/undertaking given to theGurudwara Election Commission (GEC) – The said affidavit wassworn by the then president of SAD stating that the Party wasadhering to the principle of secularism – Under the Sikh GurdwarasAct, only Sikhs can become voters or contest elections to SGPC –That this restricts membership along religious lines and cannot besaid to be secular – It was alleged that the Constitution submitted toGEC in conformity with the Sikh Gurdwaras Act is contrary to theone submitted to ECI – It was alleged that the SAD had filed a falseConstitution with ECI to gain recognition as a political party – TrialCourt passed summoning orders against the appellants to face thetrial for the offences u/ss. 420, 465, 466, 467, 468, 471 r/w s.120BIPC – Aggrieved by the summoning order, the appellants filed anapplication before the High Court u/s. 482 Cr.P.C seeking quashingof the complaint as well as the summoning order – The High Courtdismissed the said application and has refused to quash the criminalproceedings as well as the summoning order – On appeal, held:The ingredients for the offence of cheating are not at all satisfiedas there is no question of deceiving any person, fraudulently ordishonestly to deliver any property to any person and therefore,even on bare reading of the averments and allegations in thecomplaint, no case even remotely for the offence u/s. 420 IPC is made out – For the offence of forgery, there must be making of afalse document with intent to cause damage or injury to the publicor to any person and therefore, making the false documents is sinequa non – In the instant case, no false document has been producedand what was produced was the Memorandum and no otherdocuments were produced – Even according to the originalcomplainant, the Memorandum and the claim made at the time ofregistration of the Party that it has adopted a Memorandumaccepting the secularism, the same was contrary to the Constitutionof the Party produced before the Gurudwara Election Commission– Making a false claim and creating and producing the false documentboth are different and distinct – Looking to the averments andallegations in the complaint and even the material/evidence collected/recorded during the course of the inquiry and even assuming thecomplaint’s averments to be true, the ingredients of the offencepunishable u/ss. 420, 465, 466, 467, 468, 471 are not at all madeout – Under the circumstances, the entire criminal proceedingsincluding the summoning order passed by the trial Court are quashed. |
