Dinesh Chandra Somani ORDER
Dinesh Chandra Somani, J.
1. This criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred for quashing of FIR No. 41/2015 registered at Police Station, Jaswantpura, District Jalore as well as proceedings in furtherance thereof for the offences under Sections 191, 192, 196, 197, 200, 420, 467, 468, 471, 474 and 120B IPC.
2. The matter pertains to contest of election by the petitioner from Ward No. 4 as a member of Panchayat Samiti, Jaswantpura.
3. It is alleged in the FIR that alongwith the nomination paper, a certificate of Gujarat Higher Secondary Education Board, Gandhi Nagar, Examination Wing, Vadodara was submitted by the contestant, the present petitioner. The petitioner was elected as member of Panchayat Samiti, Jaswantpura, and thereafter, again filed a nomination paper for the election of Pradhan, Panchayat Samiti, Jaswantpura on 07.02.2015 and also won the said election.
4. The complainant raised a dispute regarding the petitioner's age, not being in conformity with Section 19(k) of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, and also the documents submitted by the petitioner to have inconsistency regarding the date of birth 02.07.1993 in one of the document and 02.07.1996 in another document. Leaving Certificate No. 370 of Purnima Hindi High School, Ahmedabad contained the date of birth of the petitioner as 02.07.1993, whereas the certificate issued by R.K. Modern Upper Primary School, Ghaseri contained the date of birth of the petitioner as 02.07.1996.
5. The investigation has been completed and challan had been filed before the competent court, but was returned to the investigating officer on 28.03.2017 for making necessary correction.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court towards the applications filed by the petitioner and her family members before the competent court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No. 6, Ahmedabad, whereby, as per Gujarat Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Regulations, 1974, Regulations 12(k) and 12(k)(6), they had sought change in the date of birth of the petitioner.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner also drew the attention of this Court to the orders passed by the learned court below in application No. 907/2017, whereby the amendment in the date of birth, as sought by the petitioner has been allowed and a Tehrir regarding the same has been issued, which is also on record.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that in the larger interest of justice, the investigating authority should have considered all these documents, which have been subsequently produced by the petitioner before the investigating authority, even when the investigation has been completed. In support of this submission, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Pooja Pal Vs. Union of India & Ors., MANU/SC/0071/2016 : 2016 Cri.L.J. 2038, relevant para 72 of which is as follows:-
"72. The precedential ordainment against absolute prohibition for assignment for investigation to any impartial agency like the CBI, submission of the charge-sheet by the normal investigating agency in law notwithstanding, albeit in an exceptional fact situation warranting such initiative, in order to secure a fair, honest and complete investigation and to consolidate the confidence of the victim(s) and the public in general in the justice administering mechanism, is thus unquestionably absolute and hallowed by time. Such a measure however can by no means be a matter of course or routine but has to be essentially adopted in order to live up to and effectuate the salutary objective of guaranteeing an independent and upright mechanism of justice dispensation without fear or favour, by treating all alike."
9. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that in order to secure a fair, honest and complete investigation and to consolidate the confidence of the victim and the public in general in the justice administering mechanism, is thus unquestionably permitted to make further investigation in any case on the orders of the Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner further prayed that the investigating authority may be directed to consider all the documents produced by the petitioner in the right earnest and the same be taken on record before filing of the challan.
10. Learned counsel for the respondent however, vehemently opposed the aforesaid submissions on the ground that an application had been moved by the petitioner before the learned court below seeking further investigation in the case and the same was withdrawn on 21.04.2017 as not pressed, and therefore, once such an application was withdrawn before the competent court on 21.04.2017, then the petitioner had no right to contest the investigation before this Court. Learned counsel for the respondent has also stated that the petitioner ought to have disclosed the fact of the application having been withdrawn on 21.04.2017.
11. Learned counsel for the petitioner, at this stage, stated that there is no question of any information, because the present misc. petition has been preferred much prior to filing or not pressing of the application, as the present misc. petition has been preferred on 17.04.2017, whereas the aforesaid application was not pressed on 21.04.2017.
12. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that since the investigation has been completed, therefore, any investigation on their own, without orders of the Court would not be appropriate and would not be in accordance with law.
13. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties as well as perusing the record of the case alongwith the precedent law cited at the Bar, this Court is of the opinion that the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Pooja Pal Vs. Union of India & Ors. (supra) applies in this case, as the investigation has been completed, but in the interest of complete and fair investigation and for enforcement of the fundamental rights judged on the touchstone of high public interest and the paramountcy of the rule of law, it would be appropriate to direct the investigating authority to consider all the documents that have been placed on record by the petitioner.
14. In light of the aforesaid discussion, the present misc. petition is disposed of with a direction to the investigating authority to take all the documents submitted by the petitioner on record, and conduct fair investigation regarding these documents before re-filing of the challan before the competent court. However, this order shall not prejudice the case on its own merits and the investigating authority shall be free to proceed in accordance with law and conclude the investigation after considering all the documents, as directed. The stay application also stands disposed of.
© Manupatra Information Solutions Pvt. Ltd.