HC: Sufficient material on record to summon Badals
ON FRIDAY, THE HC DISMISSED A 2019 PLEA AGAINST SAD LEADERS’ SUMMONING IN THE ALLEGED FORGERY CASE
CHANDIGARH: The high court said there was sufficient material on record before the Hoshairpur judicial magistrate to summon former chief minister Parkash Singh Badal, his son and Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) president Sukhbir Singh Badal and party vice-president Daljit Singh Cheema in an alleged forgery case involving their undertakings with regard to the constitution of the party.
In a 51-page judgment, the high court bench of justice GS Sandhawalia observed that it would not be appropriate for the HC to go into the merits of the case. “Sufficient material has come on record wherein two contrary stands have been taken regarding the constitution of the political party and whether it has adopted the principles of secularism or is still a religious party. It has also come on record that the SAD has been contesting the Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee polls,” the bench observed in its detailed judgment released on Saturday.
On Friday, the high court had dismissed a 2019 plea against the SAD leaders’ summoning in the alleged forgery case.
On November 4, 2019, a Hoshiarpur court had summoned them in a 2009 case of alleged forgery and cheating filed by one Balwant Singh Khera. The SAD possessed two constitutions and gave a false undertaking to the Election Commission of India (ECI) that it had amended its constitution to incorporate the principles of socialism and secularism to fulfil the constitutional obligation to obtain recognition as a political party.
But it continued its activities as a religious outfit as well to fight the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC) polls, he had alleged, adding that even the resolution as claimed was not passed by the general house of the party.
The high court further observed that on consideration of the materials supplied by the complaint, examination of same and his witnesses or report of inquiry, if a prima facie case is made out, process of summoning could be initiated against the accused.
“The court is not required to evaluate the evidence and its merits, and whether there is sufficient material to record a conviction or not, is not to be gone into,” it said, adding that there are several stages yet to be passed by the complainant himself. Opportunity would come to the petitioners too to reply, cross-examine the witnesses and dig holes in the complainant’s case. The charge also is only liable to be framed, if the magistrate comes to the conclusion that accused has committed an offence after evaluating necessary evidence.
As of Badal, in whose case it was argued that he was not named in the complaint but still summoned, the court observed that once the material has come on record, prima facie showing his involvement being the office-bearer of the party and in filing of the undertakings wherein contrary stands were taken and the fact that resolution incorporated the issue of secularism was not passed by the House but the impression given was to the contrary, there was sufficient material for the magistrate to summon him.