Komal Prasad Shakya vs Rajendra Singh

and Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.6319 of 2014 dated 28.06.2016.

Page 1 of 21 By the said judgment, the High Court has quashed the Criminal

Complaint filed against the individual respondents herein, by the

appellant in Criminal Appeal No.1222 of 2018, before the Chief

Judicial Magistrate First Class, Guna. The complaint was filed in

Criminal Complaint Case No.1072 of 2014 for offences under

Sections 415, 416, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of the Indian Penal

Code, 1860 (for short the “IPC”). The Chief Judicial Magistrate First

Class, by order dated 28.05.2014, took cognizance for offences

punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC and

issued summons to the accused. The Additional Sessions Judge, by

his order dated 01.07.2014, had dismissed the revision filed by the

accused. The case was committed to the Sessions Court by the order

dated 30.08.2014. However, by the impugned order, the proceedings

stand quashed.

2. The complainant, Komal Prasad Shakya, is in appeal before us

in Criminal Appeal No.1222 of 2018, aggrieved by the quashment of

proceedings against accused Rajendra Singh, Harvir Singh and Amrik

Singh. In the second matter, one Sh. Rakesh Mishra and one Sh. Anil

Sharma have obtained leave from this Court to challenge the

Page 2 of 21 quashment order and they have challenged the order claiming

themselves to be social activists, including against the accused Smt.

Kiran Jain (not part of the first appeal).

AVERMENTS IN THE COMPLAINT: -

3. The facts lie in a narrow compass. Criminal Complaint Case

No.1072 of 2014 was filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate

alleging that accused Rajendra Singh and Amrik Singh - son and

father respectively and are members of the unreserved category. They

throughout held themselves out as General Category candidates. In

the school admission register of Accused No. 1, he was shown as a

“Sikh”. Accused Nos.1 and 2 did not belong to Scheduled Caste and

before 20.02.2008 never claimed to be belonging to Scheduled Caste.

They obtained ration card as General Category persons.

4. According to the Complaint, Accused No.1-Rajendra Singh,

knowing that he is not a member of the Scheduled Caste, contested

the 029 Guna Legislative Assembly Seat as a reserved category

candidate, claiming himself to be belonging to the Scheduled Caste-

Sansi. False information and affidavit were given claiming that he

belonged to Sansi caste. Even Amrik Singh, the father, in support of

Page 3 of 21 his son submitted false affidavit before the Tehsildar, Guna and

forged the documents. Accused No.1, Rajendra Singh, hiding the

facts wrote about him as belonging to Sansi caste both in the

application and the affidavit and obtained the certificate of being

member of the Scheduled Caste from the Tehsildar, Guna and then

from the Sub-Divisional Officer, Guna on the basis of the temporary

certificate. The accused No.1, Rajendra Singh, knowing that he is not

of the Sansi caste, in the election to the Guna Assembly, gave forged

affidavit and application and used the certificate obtained on the basis

of false information for contesting the Legislative Assembly Election.

The other accused conspired with the accused No.1 in helping him

obtain Scheduled Caste Certificate on the basis of false facts and

affidavit. The other accused gave statement of certification,

investigation report, and signed panchnamas in favour of Accused

No.1.

5. The Complainant averred that the accused Kiran Jain, being

Councilor of Ward No.16, gave certification that accused Rajendra

Singh belonged to Sansi caste, knowing that Rajendra Singh did not

belong to Sansi caste. The accused Harvir Singh, from the

Page 4 of 21 Gurudwara Management Committee, Guna, gave certification of

Rajendra Singh Saluja-Accused No.1 as belonging to Sansi caste

knowing that the Accused No.1 did not belong to Sansi caste.

6. Similar allegations of conspiracy were also made against other

accused arraigned in the complaint. That accused Gajadhar Prasad

Agarwal submitted false affidavit and statement to Tehsil, Guna,

knowing fully well that accused-Rajendra Singh and his father Amrik

Singh were not members of the Scheduled Caste. Equally, accused

Dr. R.S. Bhati gave a false medical certificate. Accused-Awadhesh

Maheshwari prepared one panchnama on false basis and signed the

panchnama stating wrongly that the accused-Rajendra Singh is of

‘Sansi’ caste. It was also falsely mentioned that accused-Rajendra

Singh was residing in the State of Punjab in the year 1950 and that the

caste was Sansi. On the said panchnama accused-Mahendra Sharma,

Patwari, also signed and prepared forged documents and helped in the

preparation of the caste certificate. Accused-Virender Katare misused

the post of Tehsildar and issued provisional caste certificate stating

that accused-Rajendra Singh is of ‘Sansi’ caste. Accused-D.K. Jain,

Sub-Divisional Officer, by not adopting the laid-down procedure,

Page 5 of 21 issued permanent caste certificate to accused-Rajendra Singh without

doing any investigation himself. The accused-Awadhesh Pratap

Singh did not do investigation according to the instructions of the

Investigation Committee about the caste of Accused No.1.

7. It was further averred in the complaint that the Scheduled Caste

Certificates Investigation Committee, Bhopal found that the accused

was not a resident of Madhya Pradesh before the year 1950. The

Committee, after finding that the certificate was wrongly issued,

cancelled the certificate issued to Rajendra Singh. The High Court

dismissed the Writ Petition of Rajendra Singh on 21.03.2012. The

Writ Appeal was dismissed on 17.05.2012 and this Court dismissed

the Special Leave Petition on 04.03.2013. The caste certificate was

confiscated on 26.05.2012. In spite of complaint to the Superintendent

of Police, no action being taken, the complaint was lodged against the

accused for offences punishable under Sections 415, 416, 420, 467,

468, 471 and 120B, IPC.

8. On 28.05.2014, after recording the solemn affirmation of

witnesses, the Trial Court took cognizance and issued summons

against accused-Rajendra Singh (under Sections 420, 467, 468 and

Page 6 of 21 471 IPC) and against Amrik Singh, Harvir Singh & Kiran Jain (under

Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 120B, IPC). The

complaint was dismissed with regard to the other accused. The

revision filed before the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Guna by the

accused was dismissed on 01.07.2014. On 30.08.2014 the Trial Judge

committed the case to the Sessions Court.

9. The respondents filed two separate Quash Petitions in the High

Court. While Harvir Singh, Amrik Singh and Rajendra Singh filed

Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.5897 of 2014, Kiran Jain filed

Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.6319 of 2014. The High Court

having allowed the Quash Petitions by its judgment dated 28.06.2016,

the appellants are before us in appeal(s).

ORDER OF THE HIGH COURT: -

10. The High Court virtually conducted a dress rehearsal of the trial.

The High Court held that the conduct of Rajendra Singh in claiming

himself to be a “Sikh”, first for a number of years, and only thereafter

setting-up the case that he was a Sansi, could be due to ignorance of

law; that the case of Harvir Singh and Kiran Jain were similar to the

other accused against whom cognizance was not taken; that due to

Page 7 of 21 legal illiteracy it was possible that being a member of “Sikh”

community, father or grandfather of the accused-Rajendra Singh

would not have thought that they can claim for various reservations

on the basis of their caste and, therefore, the applicants have declared

themselves as “Sikh” while filling-up the column in various

applications and other documents; that there was no evidence to show

that information received from the office of Tehsildar of Amritsar was

manipulated by the accused-Rajendra Singh or his father Amrik

Singh; and that one Sub-Inspector sent for verification of the

information, found the information to be correct that the forefathers of

the accused-Rajendra Singh were registered as ‘Sansi’ by the office of

Tehsildar, Amritsar.

11. The High Court also rendered a categoric finding about offences

under Sections 467, 468 and 471 not being attracted based on the text

of the caste certificate. The High Court held that insufficiency of

evidence leading to the issuance of the caste certificate will not attract

the offence of forgery.

12. It was further held that when the said document was not

challenged and no evidence was produced that information or

Page 8 of 21 certificate issued by the Tehsildar, Amritsar was not correct, then it

cannot be said that by filing of an application and getting a caste

certificate dated 08.08.2008 the accused-Rajendra Singh had

committed the crime of cheating. Similarly, it was held by the High

Court that if on the basis of information given by the senior members

of the family, the accused-Amrik Singh had executed an affidavit in

support of the accused-Rajendra Singh, then it cannot be said that he

participated in the conspiracy of cheating. No criminal act emerges

from the cancellation of the certificate by the High Powered Scrutiny

Committee. Hence, according to the High Court, none of the offences

for which cognizance was taken was attracted, so holding the High

Court quashed the proceedings.

CONTENTIONS OF LEARNED COUNSEL: -

13. We have heard Mr. Anuj Bhandari, learned counsel for the

appellant and Ms. Ruchi Kohli, learned senior counsel for the

accused-respondents.

14. Mr. Anuj Bhandari, learned counsel, submits that as evidenced

by the ration card and other documents, accused-Rajendra Singh

claimed to be a General Category candidate all his life, and none of

Page 9 of 21 his family members ever claimed to be Scheduled Caste. It was only

on 08.08.2008, just two months prior to the declaration of election,

accused-Rajendra Singh got a false caste certificate issued in his name

stating to be of “Sansi” community (Scheduled Caste). On the

strength of the said false certificate the accused contested from the

Guna Constituency and won the election.

15. The Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, by its order dated

10.08.2011, rightly set aside the caste certificate and the challenge to

the orders of the Caste Scrutiny Committee by the accused-Rajendra

Singh were not fruitful.

16. Learned counsel relied on the judgment of this Court in Kumari

Madhuri Patil and Another vs Addl. Commissioner, Tribal

Development and Others1, wherein this Court in Para 13(14) held

that- in case scrutiny committee found that the certificate obtained or

social status claimed was found to be false, the parent/guardian/the

candidate should be prosecuted for making false claim; learned

counsel submitted that there is clear allegation about the forgery of

the panchnama in the complaint; learned counsel submitted that the

1 (1994) 6 SCC 241

Page 10 of 21 matter ought to have been set down for trial and should not have been

nipped in the bud; learned counsel submitted that the offence of

cheating is clearly attracted and submitted that the word “property”

occurring under Section 420, IPC, is what the person benefitted

acquires. Learned counsel contended that the defence of the accused

could not be looked to at the stage of considering the Quash Petition.

17. Ms. Ruchi Kohli, learned senior counsel appearing for the

accused submitted that complaint reeks of malafide, and is a witch-

hunt against the accused. According to the learned senior counsel, no

criminality was attributed by the Caste Scrutiny Committee. Learned

senior counsel submits that the complaint, even if taken at the face

value, the allegations pertaining to forgery i.e., Sections 467, 468 and

471 IPC, have not been established as taking the case of the

complainant at the highest, obtaining documents based on false

information would not be forgery. According to the learned senior

counsel, the complainant has nowhere alleged that the answering

respondent has signed, sealed, executed or prepared the document. In

view of that, there is no case of commission of forgery being made

out.

Page 11 of 21

18. Learned senior counsel further contends that the impugned order

has rightly recorded that there was no evidence on record to establish

that there was any manipulation of record at the office of the

Tehsildar, Amritsar. Learned senior counsel contends that even the

SP who verified the information stated that the Tehsildar had in fact,

given the information. The learned senior counsel contends that there

being no malafide intent in obtaining the certificate, no element of

cheating also is attracted and the caste certificate was cancelled due to

lack of procedural norms being followed. The learned senior counsel

prayed for dismissal of the Civil Appeal(s).

FINDINGS: -

19. We have carefully considered the contentions of the learned

counsels for the parties and perused the records.

20. The undisputed facts that emerge are that the respondent-

accused Rajendra Singh on 08.08.2008 obtained the caste certificate

showing him as Scheduled Caste from the Sub-Divisional Officer,

Guna, portraying him as belonging to ‘Sansi’ caste. It is also

undisputed that the responded-accused Rajendra Singh contested the

Page 12 of 21 election to the 029-Guna (SC reserved) Assembly Constituency and

won the election. On a reference to the Scrutiny Committee, by its

order dated 10.08.2011, the Scrutiny Committee directed the

forfeiture of the caste certificate by recording the following operative

directions:

“(4) It was found after examination of record and statements of witnesses that Caste Certificate of 'Sansi' has been issued in the name of Sri Rajendra Singh Saluja only on the basis of affidavits and statements of witnesses. There is no certified document regarding in proof of being residents of Saluja's family of Central India prior to 1950. It was also found that Rajendra Singh Saluja has not mentioned his caste "Sansi" in any important documents and at other places.

During inquiry of application of Sri Rajendra Singh Saluja for obtaining Caste Certificate, it is evident from sending of letter to Tehsildar, Amritsar with "Q" number through FAX on 5.5.2008 and after receiving information on 20.5.2008 and issuing Provisional Caste Certificate on 31.5.2008 that competent Revenue Officer has been benefited for doing favour to Sri Rajendra Singh Saluja. In this entire case, prescribed procedure for disposal of revenue matters under M.P. Land Revenue Code, such as, issuing notice, service of notice, maintenance of records etc, have not been complied with.

In totality, this is the decision of Committee after consideration of this matter that Sri Rajendra Singh Saluja failed in producing documentary evidence regarding being resident of Madhya Pradesh in 1950. Issuing of Certificate of Sansi Caste by Revenue Officers in illegal manner was found Page 13 of 21 and for this, Revenue Officer and Investigating Police Officer are responsible. Committee holds the decision of canceling and forfeiting the Caste Certificate of Sansi Caste dated 8.8.2008 of Sri Rajendra Singh Saluja.

Committee also recommends for taking disciplinary action against Issuing Officer of Caste Certificate, Inquiry Officers and non-applicant for taking undue advantage of the post reserved for Scheduled Caste in unauthorized manner.

The aforesaid Caste Certificate of Sri Rajendra Singh Saluja, son of Sri Amrik Singh Saluja be forfeited getting it cancelled with immediate effect and action be initiated under different Acts.”

The decision has been sustained right up to this Court.

21. We have perused the Criminal Complaint filed on 18.07.2013 in

Criminal Case No.1072 of 2014. We have summarized the complaint

in the earlier part of the judgment. As would be clear from the

averments summarized above, it could not be said that on a reading of

the complaint and the unimpeachable documents that no offence

under Sections 420, 467, 468, and 471, IPC, against accused-Rajendra

Singh and Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 120B, IPC,

against accused-Amrik Singh, Harvir Singh and Smt. Kiran Jain are

prima facie made out. No doubt the ultimate outcome will be subject

to further proof at the trial. In other words, it could not be said that on

Page 14 of 21 a demurrer the complaint can be quashed against the said four

accused.

22. It is clearly alleged in the complaint that Rajendra Singh and

Amrik Singh belong to General category and always held out

themselves to be belonging to General category and only for the

purpose of contesting the election as a reserved candidate on the eve

of the election submitted documents and affidavits and panchnama

for obtaining the caste certificate. We have also perused the order

taking cognizance. The learned Trial Judge has meticulously applied

his mind and sifted the chaff from the grain and out of twelve accused

arrayed has, for the reason adduced, taken cognizance only against the

four respondents-accused herein.

23. We are consciously not delving into the merits of the averments

lest it prejudice the case of the accused at the trial. The High Court

has conducted a mini trial as is clear from the following findings:

“(19) As discussed above, due to legal illiteracy, it is possible that being a member of "Sikh" community, father or grand- father of the applicant Rajendra Singh would not have thought that they can claim for various reservations etc. on the basis of their caste and therefore the applicant Rajendra Singh and his family members have used the name of the community as "Sikh" while filling up column of caste in various applications and documents. However, it is pertinent to note Page 15 of 21 that there is no evidence filed by the complainant to show that the information received from the office of Tahsildar of Tahsil Amritsar [State of Punjab] was manipulated by the applicant Rajendra Singh or his father Amreek Singh. One Sub-Inspector was sent for verification of that information and he found the information to be correct that the forefathers of applicant Rajendra Singh were registered as "Sansi" by caste in the office of Tahsildar of Tahsil Amritsar [State of Punjab]. It would be clear that due to such verification, S.P. Guna did not register any criminal case against any of the applicants, after getting the order of High Power Scrutiny Committee. When that document was not challenged and no evidence was produced that information or certificate issued by the Tahsildar, Amritsar, was not correct then it cannot be said that by filing of an application and getting a caste certificate dated 08.08.2008, the applicant Rajendra Singh had committed a crime of cheating. Similarly, if on the basis of information given by the senior members of the family, the applicant Amreek Singh had executed an affidavit in support of the applicant Rajendra Singh then it cannot be said that he participated in the conspiracy of cheating.

(20) In the order dated 10.08.2011 passed by the High Power Scrutiny Committee, no comments were given on the certificate or the information received from the office of Tahsildar of Tahsil Amritsar. Hence, though the certificate was cancelled and forfeited but no criminal aspect emerges from that cancellation order because the High Power Scrutiny Committee did not give any opinion that information received from the office of Tahsildar of Tahsil Amritsar was incorrect or such information was recorded in that office by fraudulent applications etc. (21) As discussed above that possibility cannot be ruled out that the applicant Rajendra Singh was not aware about his caste. He and his father were of the view that initially they were "Sikh" but when they obtained an information that amongst the Sikh community there are so many castes and they were of the caste "Sansi" then if the applicant has claimed for the right of that caste by moving an application to get a caste certificate and a caste certificate was also provided

Page 16 of 21 by Sub-Divisional Officer, Guna on 08.08.2008 then in the light of the information received from office of Tahsildar of Tahsil Amritsar [State of Punjab] the overt act of the applicants Rajendra Singh and Amreek Singh do not fall within the purview of cheating. When the applicant Rajendra Singh got an intimation that he belongs to "Sansi" caste which falls within the Scheduled Caste category then if he moved any application and collected some documents in support of his application then he had every right to prosecute his rights. Unless it was established that the information sent by office of Tahsildar of Tahsil Amritsar [State of Punjab] was incorrect or those were prepared due to fraudulent activities of the applicant Rajendra Singh or his father applicant Amreek Singh then prima facie it shall be presumed that the forefathers of the applicant Rajendra Singh were registered as the persons belonging to "Sansi" by caste at office of Tahsildar of Tahsil Amritsar [State of Punjab]. Hence, though the caste certificate was cancelled and forfeited by the High Power Scrutiny Committee but no criminal indication emerges by the cancellation of that certificate. Hence, if the applicant Rajendra Singh and his father Amreek Singh have tried to get an advantage of the caste of their forefathers whose caste was already registered soon after the year 1950 at the office of Tahsildar of Tahsil Amritsar [State of Punjab] then their conduct does not fall within the purview of cheating. Nobody is prohibited to get the advantage of his/her caste. It is a different thing that due to non-availability of proper evidence and without proceeding according to the appropriate procedure the Sub-Divisional Officer, Guna had issued a caste certificate in favour of the applicant Rajendra Singh and thereafter it was cancelled by the High Power Scrutiny Committee then still the applicant Rajendra Singh and Amreek Singh cannot be held guilty of offence of cheating. Hence, no offence under Section 420 of IPC or inferior offence of similar nature is prima facie made out against the applicants Rajendra Singh as well as Amreek Singh.

Page 17 of 21 (22) On the basis of the aforesaid discussion, it would be apparent that no offence under Section 467, 468 or 471 of IPC is made out against any of the applicants either directly or with the help of Section 120-B of IPC because the caste certificate dated 08.08.2008 was not prima facie established to be forged. Similarly, in the light of the information given by office of Tahsildar of Tahsil Amritsar [State of Punjab] where the caste of the forefathers of the applicant Rajendra Singh is mentioned as "Sansi", no offence of cheating is made out against any of the applicants either directly or with the help of Section 120-B of IPC. Both the courts below did not consider the legal aspects of the case as discussed above and orders passed by the courts below are perverse. Though the present petitions are allowable against the orders passed by the courts below, however, applicants have also challenged the registration of complaint and therefore this Court is competent to quash the proceedings of the criminal complaint before the concerned court.” (Emphasis supplied)

24. The findings about legal illiteracy are conjectural and patently

erroneous. Further at the stage of exercising powers under Section

482 to record that no evidence was produced is also untenable. The

further finding that the accused-Rajendra Singh and Amrik Singh

were unaware about the caste initially is also conjectural in nature. In

so far as accused-Harvir Singh and Smt. Kiran Jain are concerned the

averments in complaint are to the effect that accused-Kiran Jain being

Councilor of Ward No.16 gave certification of the accused-Rajendra

Singh being of Sansi caste with the knowledge that accused-Rajendra

Page 18 of 21 Singh was not of Sansi caste. Similarly, Harvir Singh also certifying

about the accused-Rajendra Singh as belonging to the Sansi caste was

alleged in the complaint to be an act done to favour Rajendra Singh.

25. The argument of Ms. Ruchi Kohli, learned senior counsel that

the complaint was a witch-hunt is too sweeping a statement to be

accepted particularly in view of the finding of the Scrutiny

Committee. The further argument that no case for offences under

Sections 467, 468, and 471, IPC are attracted is also a contention

which cannot be accepted at this stage. The averments in the

complaint do allege forgery having been practiced for obtaining the

certificate. The relevant paras of the complaint are extracted

hereinbelow:-

“6. The accused no. 2 to 11 in collusion with accused no. 1, with the intention to give him benefit, under a conspiracy in making Scheduled caste certificate on the basis of false facts, giving affidavit in favour of accused no. 1, giving statement of certification, giving investigation report in his favour and signing on the panchnama, fully contributed and forging the fake documents, cheatingly got involved in the conspiracy and deliberately did the crime.

7. …The accused no. 11 Avdesh Maheshwari to give benefit to the accused Rajinder Singh, joining in conspiracy prepared one panchnama on dated 30.03.2008 on false basis and did his signatures and in the panchnama this was totally false and forged writing that the accused Rajinder Singh is of Sansi caste. This

Page 19 of 21 false and forged thing was also written that the family of the accused Rajinder Singh was residing in Punjab State in the year 1950. And their caste is Sansi. On this very Panchnama the accused no. 5 Mahender Sharma Patwari also signed and preparing forged documents, involved in the conspiracy and helped him in preparing caste certificate…

8. …The accused Virender Katare considered correct the letter and panchnama of the Tehsildar without any fair investigation, having false basis whereas that is forged document which has been managed by the accused Rajinder Singh Saluja himself in collusion with Virender Katare. The panchnama which has been considered as basis by the accused Virender Katare that is in Hindi and there the word of caste not being Sansi rather Sanhsi has been written.”

26. As to whether the offences will be made out at the trial will

depend on the evidence adduced. At this stage, it cannot be said that

there is a case for nipping the prosecution for these accused at the

bud.

27. Equally, the contention that Section 420, IPC, is not attracted

even taking the complaint as it is, is also a contention which is bereft

of merit. The appellants contended that accused-Rajendra Singh was

the beneficiary and the caste certificate was the “property” which was

obtained by deceiving the authorities. As to whether the complainant

is able to make good the case at the trial will depend upon the

evidence which is forthcoming.

Page 20 of 21

28. In view of what has been stated hereinabove, we allow the

appeals and set aside the order of the High Court dated 28.06.2016 in

Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.5897 of 2014 and Miscellaneous

Criminal Case No.6319 of 2014. The Criminal Complaint Case

No.1072 of 2014 on the file of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Guna,

along with the order dated 28.05.2014 taking cognizance will stand

restored to the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate First Class, Guna. We

direct that the trial shall be proceeded with from that stage.

Considering that it is a complaint of 2014 we further direct that the

trial be concluded expeditiously in any event within a period of one

year from today. Needless to observe that the trial will be held

uninfluenced by the findings of the High Court and this Court in the

present proceeding.

……….........................J. [B.V. NAGARATHNA]

……….........................J. [K. V. VISWANATHAN]

New Delhi;

14th October, 2025

Page 21 of 21