Madhya Pradesh High Court
Reena Raikwar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 13 December, 2018
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH JABALPUR
Cr. Rev. No.3179/2017
Reena Raikwar and another
Vs.
State of Madhya Pradesh
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Present : Hon'ble Shri Justice Vishnu Pratap Singh Chauhan
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Name of counsel for the parties:
Shri S.K. Kashyap, counsel for the petitioners.
Shri Deependra Mishra, Govt Adv. for the respondent/State.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ORDER
(13.12.2018) The petitioners have filed this revision under Sec.397/401 of the Cr.P.C., being aggrieved by the order dated 12.8.2017 passed by First Additional District Judge, Mandla Link Court Niwas, Distt. Mandla in Sessions Trial No.09/2017, whereby the learned ASJ has framed charges for the offences punishable under Sec.467, 468, 471 and 201 of the IPC, against the petitioners.
2. Facts of the case, in short, are that petitioner No.1 Reena Raikwar was appointed on the post of Samvida Shikshak Grade III, at Primary School, Malara P.S. Tikaria, Distt. Mandla and petitioner No.2 Reeta Raikwar on the post of Samvida Shikshak Grade II, at Naveen Primary School, Padmi. On the basis of certificate issued by the SDO showing that they belong to the caste of Scheduled Tribe. A complaint was received in the 4 Cr. Rev. No.544/2018 office of Superintendent of Police, which was written by a vigilant citizen. Copy of the same was sent to the Additional Director General of Police, STF, Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal, Inspector General of Police, Range Jabalpur and DIG, Police, Range Jabalpur. On enquiry about the facts mentioned in the complaint, it was found that SDO, Ranjhi, Gorakhpur and Gohalpur had not issued any such certificate in favour of the petitioners. On that basis, Crime No.165/15 has been registered against the petitioners for offences under Sec.420, 467, 468 and 471 read with Sec.34 of the IPC. After completion of the investigation, the charge sheet was filed and ultimately, the case was committed to the Court of learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Link Court Niwas, Distt. Mandla. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, vide order dated 12.8.2017 framed charges for the offences punishable under Sec.420, 467, 468 and 471 of the IPC, against the petitioners. Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioners have filed this revision.
3. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners belong to Manjhi by caste and write their sub-caste Raikwar. The Government of Madhya Pradesh, by adopting due procedure, included Batham, Dheemar, Navik and other casts. The principle laid down by the Supreme Court in case of Madhuri Patil Vs. Additional Commissioner Welfare AIR 1994 SC 95, has issued directions that in every State an enquiry committee be constituted to enquiry into the false caste certificate of SC/ST/OBC, and also issued guidelines that only if on final enquiry report by the State Level Committee the caste certificate is found false, only then the police can register a criminal case or other 4 Cr. Rev. No.544/2018 action may be taken. In pursuance of the directions issued by Hon. the Supreme Court, Government of Madhya Pradesh constituted a State Level Committee, which is the only committee empowered to enquiry into the matter whether the cast certificate is false or not. Both the petitioners are being tried jointly in the sessions trial, which is an exception and should be tried separately, because the petitioners have not committed the offence jointly. Joint trial against the petitioners will cause miscarriage of justice. Accordingly the petitioners prayed that the impugned order dated 12.8.17 be set aside, and direction be issued to sent the caste certificate to the State Level Committee to enquiry whether the caste certificate issued is false or not.
4. Learned Govt. Advocate has submitted that it is not a case of issuance of false caste certificate by competent authority. This is a case in which the petitioners prepared a forged document, shown to be purportedly issued by SDO, Gohalpur and on the basis of this forged document and caste certificate, they got appointment on the post of Samvida Sikshak. There is no need to send the caste certificate to the State Level Committee, for enquiry whether the caste certificate issued is false or not.
5. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusal of record, it appears that the charge sheet has been filed against the petitioners after completion of investigation. During enquiry, it was found that both the petitioners manage to get appointment on the post of Samvida Shikshak on the basis of false caste certificate submitted by them at the time of filling the application forms for appointment on the said 4 Cr. Rev. No.544/2018 post. Prima facie, there is sufficient material available on record to show that alleged certificates are not issued by the SDO, Gohalpur/Gorakhpur or Ranjhi; both the petitioners prepared forged caste certificate and submitted it along with their application form for getting appointment on the post of Samvida Shishak. In my considered opinion, there is no need to refer the matter to the State Level Committed for opinion, whether the caste certificate is fake or not. All the ingredients relating to the aforesaid offences by which the petitioners have been charged, are present, Therefore, in my considered opinion, there is no need to interfere in the impugned order passed by the learned ASJ.
6. Consequently, the petition, being devoid of merits, is hereby dismissed.
No order as to costs.
(Vishnu Pratap Singh Chauhan) JUDGE ns Digitally signed by Neeraj Sarvate Date: 2018.12.16 23:49:39 +05'30'