Madhya Pradesh High Court
Pukhraj Meena vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 30 July, 2019
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2019 MP 879
1 M.Cr.C. No.21740/2019
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
M.Cr.C. No.21740/2019
Pukhraj Meena Vs. State of M.P.
Indore, Dated:30.07.2019
Shri.S.Jaiswal, learned counsel for petitioner.
Shri Manu Maheshwari, learned counsel for
respondent/State.
Heard finally with consent.
By this petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the FIR lodged against him in Crime No.30/2013 dated 20/12/2013 as also the charge sheet in connection therewith.
The prosecution case as reflected in the FIR is that the petitioner had obtained employment as Patvari on the basis of the forged caste certificate relating to Meena caste, hence his services were terminated.
Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the FIR has been registered on the basis of the order of the SDO dated 12/10/2012 and thereafter the subsequent circulars have been taken into account and fresh order has been passed finding the caste certificate to be genuine and reinstating the petitioner's service. He has further submitted that even otherwise the jurisdiction in this regard lies with the Caste Scrutiny Committee and that the criminal prosecution cannot be allowed.
Counsel for State has opposed the writ petition but has not disputed the documents which have been relied upon by learned counsel for petitioner in respect of the Digitally signed by Varghese Mathew Date: 31/07/2019 17:29:29 2 M.Cr.C. No.21740/2019 subsequent change of position as also the circulars relied upon by him.
Having heard the learned counsel for parties and on perusal of the record, it is noticed that the SDO, Sarangpur, District Rajgarh has passed the order dated 12/10/2012 holding that the Caste Certificate of the petitioner was not issued from his office or from the office of the Naib Tehsildar, therefore, it was a fabricated caste certificate. He has also referred to some enquiry report mentioning that the caste certificate was not issued by the Naib Tehsildar, Anantpur, Tehsil Lateri, District Vidisha and on that basis the caste certificate was fabricated and the petitioner's services were terminated with a further direction to register FIR against the petitioner. On the basis of the said order, the FIR was registered against the petitioner. The undisputed documents on record reflects that subsequently the matter was reopened in the light of the circular issued from time to time and taking note of the circular dated 9/9/1987 and 1/11/1990 the SDO, Sarangpur had passed the fresh order dated 4/10/2018 finding that the caste certificate which issued to the petitioner was not a fabricated caste certificate and accordingly reinstating the petitioner in service. The said order reads as under:-
bl fo"k; es vkosnd Jh iq[kjkt ehuk }kjk e/;izns'k 'kklu lkekU; iz'kklu foHkkx ea=ky;] oYyHk Hkou Hkksiky ds ifji= dzekad ,Q 7&37@2001@vk-iz@,d] Hkksiky 18-01-2002 dh izfr vius vH;kosnu ds lkFk izLrqr dh gS tks leLRk foHkkx/;{k ,oa dysDVj dks lEcksf/kr gS ftldh df.Mdk 2 ds vuqlkj mYysf[kr gS fd mijksDRk funsZ'kksa ds vuq:i gh vc ;g fu.kZ; fy;k x;k gS fd iwoZ es fu;qDr ehuk tkfr ds ftu yksxksa ds fo:) tkfr izek.k i= ds vk/kkj ij lsok ls fu"dklu ;k vU; dksbZ dk;Zokgh dh tk jgh gS] mls fQygky rRdky izHkko ls vkxkeh vkns'k rd LFkfxr j[kh tkosA rRdkyhu vqufoHkkxh; vf/kdkjh }kjk vius iz'uk/khu vkns'k es bl ifji= dk Hkh ikyu ugh fd;k x;k gSA mijksDr Digitally signed by Varghese Mathew Date: 31/07/2019 17:29:29 3 M.Cr.C. No.21740/2019 leLRk vk/kkjks ds voyksdu djus ds mijkar gh dysDVj egksn;] jktx<+ }kjk Jh iq[kjkt ehuk }kjk izLrqr vH;kosnu dks vihy ds :i es ekuk tkdj 'kklu ds uohu fn'kk funsZ'kksa ds vk/kkj ij iqu% psd dj fu;ekuqlkj dk;Zokgh djus gsrq izdj.k bl dk;kZy; dks Hkstk tk x;k gSA izdj.k esa izLrqr rF;ksa] 'kklu vkns'kksa ds voyksdu ls eSa ;g ikrk gwa fd ^^iwoZ iVokjh Jh iq[kjkt ehuk rglhy ipksj dks muds }kjk izLrqr tkfr izek.k i= dh iw.kZ tkWp fo'ks"kdj muds xzke eMkork rglhy yVsjh ftyk fofn'kk ds ewy fuoklh gksus ,oa ehuk tkfr ds gksus ds laca/k es rRdkyhu vuqfoHkkxh; vf/kdkjh] lkjaxiqj }kjk tkWp ugh djkbZ tkdj dsoy nk;jk iath ls feyku ugh gksus ds vk/kkj ij izek.k i= QthZ ekuk tkdj lsok ls i`Fkd dj fn;k x;k tcfd dysDVj egksn; jktx<+ ds 1788@17@Hkw- v-@LFkk-@2017 fnukad 28-08-2017 ls lR;kiu djkus ij rglhynkj yVsjh ds i= dzekad D;w@jhMj@2017@1445 fnukad 26-12-2017 vuqlkj Jh iq[kjkt ehuk fuoklh eMkork rglhy yVsjh ds ewy fuoklh gksuk rFkk tkfr ehuk gksuk fl) gqvk gSA vr% dysDVj egksn;] jktx<+ }kjk fn, x, funsZ'kksa ds ikyu esa rFkk e/;izns'k 'kklu lkekU; iz'kklu foHkkx ea=ky;] oYyHk Hkou Hkksiky ds ifji= dzekad ,Q 7&37@2001@vk-iz@,d] Hkksiky] fnukad 18-01-2002 dh df.Mdk&2 ds izdk'k esa ,oa e/;izns'k 'kklu lkekU; iz'kklu foHkkx ea=ky;] oYyHk Hkou Hkksiky ds ifji= dzekad ,Q 7&42@2012@vkiz@,d] Hkksiky] fnukad 27 tqykbZ 2017 dh df.Mdk 2] 3 ,oa 5 ds ikyu esa Jh iq[kjkt ehuk dks tkjh tkfr izek.k i= fnukad 09-09-1987 ,oa fnukad 01-11-1990 nksuks vxLr 1996 ds iwoZ ds tkjh gksus ds dkj.k mijksDRk ifji=ksa ds izdk'k esa QthZ gksuk ugh ekuk x;k gSA vr% Jh iq[kjkt ehuk dks ¼iVokjh in½ ij iqu% lsok esa cgky fd;k tkdj rglhy ipksj esa inLFk fd;k tkrk gSA Jh iq[kjkt ehuk dks lsok ls i`Fkd fd, x, fnukad ls iqu% lsok esa cgky fd, tkus ds e/; dh vuqifLFkfr vof/k dks uks odZ iS ds fl)kar ij fujkd`r fd;k tkrk gSA vuqifLFkfr dky dk dksbZ Hkh osru HkRrk ns; ugh gksxkA fdUrq isa'ku ds fy, x.kuk ekU; dh tkosA lkFk gh e/;izns'k 'kklu lkekU; iz'kklu foHkkx ea=ky; Hkksiky ds Kki dzekad ,Q 7&19@2016@vkiz@,d] Hkksiky] fnukad 02 flrECkj 2016 vuqlkj Hkfo"; esa vuqlwfpr tutkfr dk ugh ekuk tk,xk vkSj bl frfFk ds ckn mUgs vkj{k.k dk ykHk Hkh ugh fn;k tk,xkA lkFk gh Jh iq[kjkt ehuk ds }Kjk tkfr izek.k i= vFkok lsok ls lacaf/kr dksbZ l{ke U;k;ky; es okn vFkok fjV ok;j fd, tkus ,oa l{ke U;k;ky; }kjk bl lac/k es dksbZ foifjr fVIi.kh vFkok foijhr vkns'k ikfjr fd, tkus dh fLFkfr esa og bl vkns'k ij ca/kudkjh gksxkA ;g vkns'k rRdky izHkko'khy gksxkA While passing the said order, the SDO has placed reliance upon the circular dated 18/1/2002 which reads as under:-
1- lkekU; iz'kklu foHkkx ds ifji= dzekad ,Q 7&4@98@vk-iz- @,d fnukad 06-03-1998 }kjk ;g funsZ'k tkjh fd, x, gS fd eka>h tkfr ds yksx tks vius dks vuqlwfpr tutkfr dk ekurs gS ,oa 'kkldh;Digitally signed by Varghese Mathew Date: 31/07/2019 17:29:29 4 M.Cr.C. No.21740/2019
lsok esa dk;Zjr gSa muds fu"dklu fd dh dk;Zokgh ;k vU; dksbZ dk;Zokgh dh tk jgh gks rks fQygky LFkfxr j[kh tk,A vU; dksbZ dk;Zokgh esa iqfyl }kjk fd tk jgh dk;Zokgh Hkh lfEefyr gSA 2- mijksDRk funsZ'kksa ds vuq#i gh vc ;g fu.kZ; fy;k x;k gS fd iwoZ esa fu;qDr ehuk tkfr ds ftu yksxksa ds fo:) tkfr izek.k i= ds vk/kkj ij lsok ls fu"dklu ;k vU; dksbZ dk;Zokgh dh tk jgh gS mls fQygky rRdky izHkko ls vkxkeh vkns'k rd LFkfxr j[kh tk,A He has also placed reliance upon the circular of the State government dated 27/7/2017 which provides as under:-
3- mDr vf/kdkfj;ks dks tkfr izek.k i= tkjh djus gsrq vf/kd`r djus ds tks funsZ'k tkjh fd;s x;s Fks ml le; u rks tkfr izek.k i= ds fy, vkosnu dk izko/kku Fkk vkSj u bl gsrq dksbZ izk:i fu/kkZfjr Fkk vkSj u gh budk dksbZ vfHkys[k j[kk tkrk FkkA 4- eq[; lfpo }kjk fnukad 18-07-1996 dks ,d ifji= ¼,Q 7&2@1996½ tkjh fd;k x;k Fkk ftles ;g Li"V fd;k x;k Fkk fd ,d ckj tkfr izek.k i= tkjh gksus ds i'pkr og lHkh foHkkx] midze] laLFkkvksa ds fy, ekU; gksxkA bu funsZ'kksa esa ;g Hkh mYys[k fd;k x;k Fkk fd tku&cw>dj ijs'kku djus dh n`f"V ls tkfr izek.k i= dh ekax djus okyks dks fuyaafcr fd;k tk, vkSj muds fo:) vuq'kklukRed dk;Zokgh dh tk,A 5- 'kklu ds /;ku esa ;g rF; yk;k x;k gS fd vxLr] 1996 ds iwoZ ftUgs tkfr izek.k i= tkjh gq, gS mUgsa vuko';d ijs'kku fd;k tk jgk gSA ,sls yksxksa ds tkfr izek.k i= dysDVjksa dks iqf"V gsrq Hkstus ij budk fjdkMZ dysDVj ds ikl u gksus ls budh iqf"V ugh gks ikus ds dkj.k tkfr izek.k i= /kkjd dks vusd ijs'kkfu;ksa dk lkeuk djuk iM+ jgk gSA vr% Li"V fd;k tkrk gS fd vxLr 1996 ds iwoZ lkekU; iz'kklu foHkkx ds funsZ'kksa ds varxZRk tks tkfr izek.k i= tkjh fd;s x;s gSa os vkt Hkh ekU; gSA bu izek.k i=ksa dks dsoy bl vk/kkj ij QthZ ugh ekuk tk ldrk gS fd dysDVj ds ikl mldk fjdkMZ ugh gSA ;fn tkap dh fLFkfr fufeZr gksrh gS rks dysDVj dks bldh foLr`r tkap djus ds i'pkr gh izfrosnu izsf"kr djuk pkfg,A The aforesaid order of reinstatement as well as the circular issued by the State government are not in dispute. The undisputed position on record is that the very basis of registration of the FIR i.e. the order of the SDO dated 12/10/2012 does not survive and the same has now been recalled/cancelled and the petitioner's services have been reinstated. In view of the aforesaid undisputed material, the prosecution of the petitioner for the alleged offence will Digitally signed by Varghese Mathew Date: 31/07/2019 17:29:29 5 M.Cr.C. No.21740/2019 be a futile exercise and an unnecessary harassment.
That apart, this court in the matter of Vikas Vs. State of MP2002(II) MPWN 195 (Note No.98) has held that in respect of the allegation of obtaining the caste certificate by filing wrong affidavit the police cannot investigate and Magistrate cannot take cognizance of offence u/S.420 of the IPC and the jurisdiction lies solely with the Caste Scrutiny Committee.
Having regard to the aforesaid, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case for exercise of the inherent jurisdiction u/S.482 of the Cr.P.C. Hence, the petition is allowed. The FIR as well as the charge sheet and the prosecution of the petitioner for the alleged offence u/S.420 of the IPC is quashed.
c.c as per rules.
(PRAKASH SHRIVASTAVA) Judge vm Digitally signed by Varghese Mathew Date: 31/07/2019 17:29:29