Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon another judgment in the case of Harkeshi Devi vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr., SBCRLMP No.628/2017 decided on 22.2.2017 by the co-ordinate Bench at Principal Seat at Jodhpur.

In the case of Harkeshi Devi (supra) also, it was alleged that Harkeshi Devi had concealed number of children in the nomination paper and thereby made a false declaration. The case of the prosecution in the case of Harkeshi Devi was that she was having three children but this information was not correctly furnished by her in the nomination paper.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has further placed reliance upon another judgment Amita Trivedi & Anr. vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr., 2013(2) RLW 1313 (Raj.). In the case of Amita Trivedi (supra) also, wrong information was furnished by Amita Trivedi and in the column where name of husband was to be given, she had furnished name of her father-in-law. Therefore, in the case of Amita Trivedi, the case of prosecution was that she had furnished a false declaration alongwith nomination form.

In another judgment rendered by this Court in Om Prakash Saini vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr., 2014 (1) Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 36. Om Prakash Saini candidate who contested the election had submitted a wrong affidavit regarding declaration of his assets and liabilities.

Thus, all the above judgments relied by the learned counsel for the petitioner are not attracted on the facts of the case. There is mark distinction between furnishing a wrong affidavit, making a false declaration or giving a wrong information in the nomination form, compared to furnishing a false, forged and fabricated document.

In the present case, the petitioner alongwith false declaration regarding his educational qualification had submitted a forged and fabricated transfer certificate. A document forged and fabricated outside the precincts of the court indeed amount to commission of offence regarding forgery and fabrication of documents. If the document is fabricated outside the court premises, police can register a case and try the offences.

This controversy is no longer res integra. A five Judge Bench in Iqbal Singh Marwah & Anr. vs. Meenakshi Marwah & Anr., AIR 2005 SC 2119 upheld the ratio of law laid in Sachida Nand Singh & Anr. vs. State of Bihar & Anr., (1998) 2 SCC 493. The five Judge Bench in Iqbal Singh Marwah (supra) noted ratio of law laid in Sachida Nand Singh (supra) as under:-