Supreme Court restores criminal case against MLA accused of using fake SC certificate to contest polls

The Supreme Court on Tuesday set aside a Madhya Pradesh High Court order that quashed criminal proceedings against former Member of Legislative Assembly (MLA) Rajendra Singh and others accused of securing a fake Scheduled Caste (SC) certificate to contest elections from the Guna Assembly Constituency in Madhya Pradesh [Komal Prasad Shakya v. Rajendra Singh & Ors].

A Bench of Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice KV Viswanathan said,

"...it could not be said that on a reading of the complaint and the unimpeachable documents that no offence under Sections 420, 467, 468, and 471, IPC, against accused-Rajendra Singh and Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 120B, IPC, against accused-Amrik Singh, Harvir Singh and Smt. Kiran Jain are prima facie made out. No doubt the ultimate outcome will be subject to further proof at the trial. In other words, it could not be said that on a demurrer the complaint can be quashed against the said four accused."

The Court directed the trial court to proceed with the 2014 case and to conclude the trial within one year.

The case arises from allegations that Rajendra Singh, a general category candidate, obtained a fraudulent caste certificate to contest the 2008 Guna (SC) Assembly seat. It was alleged that Singh, his father Amrik Singh and others conspired to forge documents and affidavits to secure the certificate. Several local officials and individuals, including a Tehsildar, Patwari, SDO, councillor Kiran Jain and Harvir Singh of the Gurudwara Management Committee, were accused of colluding to procure false certifications.

In 2011, the Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Bhopal determined that Singh’s certificate had been fraudulently obtained, noting the absence of proof that Singh or his family resided in Madhya Pradesh before 1950, a prerequisite for SC status. The Committee also highlighted procedural irregularities by revenue authorities, such as missing records and lack of verification, and recommended disciplinary action against the officials involved.

Challenges to the Committee’s findings were dismissed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court and the Supreme Court in 2013.

Following this, a private criminal complaint was filed in 2014 under Sections 415, 416, 420, 467, 468, 471, and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code(IPC), alleging cheating, forgery and criminal conspiracy.

The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Guna took cognizance and issued summons to Rajendra Singh, Amrik Singh, Harvir Singh and Kiran Jain, while dismissing the complaint against others. The accused moved the Madhya Pradesh High Court to quash the proceedings.

In June 2016, the High Court allowed their pleas, holding that there was no evidence of forgery or cheating. It noted that the family may have genuinely believed they belonged to the Sansi caste, and that any irregularities could be attributed to “legal illiteracy” rather than criminal intent.

The apex court disagreed, observing that the High Court had conducted a “mini-trial” at the quashing stage and made conjectural findings on the accused’s intent and knowledge.

"The findings about legal illiteracy are conjectural and patently erroneous. Further at the stage of exercising powers under Section 482 to record that no evidence was produced is also untenable."

The Court rejected the argument that the complaint amounted to a “witch-hunt,” observing that the allegations could not be dismissed at the threshold. It further added that at this stage, the prosecution against the accused could not be terminated.

"As to whether the offences will be made out at the trial will depend on the evidence adduced. At this stage, it cannot be said that there is a case for nipping the prosecution for these accused at the bud," the order said.

The Bench clarified that the trial should continue uninfluenced by its findings or those of the High Court.

Advocates Manju Jetley, Anuj Bhandari, Gaurav Jain and Disha Bhandari appeared for the appellant.

Senior Advocate Ruchi Kohli along with Additional Advocate General DS Parmar and Advocates Aman Jha, Srishti Mishra, Rishi Tutu, Kshitij Mayank, Srijan Sahu, Hitesh Kumar Sharma, Akhileshwar Jha, Charanjeet Sidhu, Shreya Jha, Jatin Malik, Rajesh Singh, Yashraj Singh Bundela, Pratima Singh, Saloni Singh, Arpit Garg, Aditya Vaibhav Singh, Pashupathi Nath Razdan, Astik Gupta, Maitree Jagat Joshi, Akansha Tomar, Anuj Bhandari, Gaurav Jain, Disha Bhandari, Manish Kumar Srivastava, Santosh Ramdurg, Birendra Kumar Mishra and Sirajuddin appeared for respondents.

[Read Judgment]