2 SAD constitutions: SC reserves verdict in cheating case against Badals

The Supreme Court on Tuesday reserved orders on a petition filed by Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) leaders, former Punjab chief minister Prakash Singh Badal and his son Sukhbir Singh Badal, challenging initiation of cheating and forgery proceedings against them in a Hoshiarpur Court on a complaint accusing them of falsely claiming to be secular before the Election Commission when the outfit was essentially religious.

Not wishing to be drawn into the determination whether SAD is a religious outfit, a bench of justices MR Shah and CT Ravikumar said it is for the Election Commission (EC) to decide whether the political outfit is religion-based while maintaining that the Court will only examine whether the allegations in the complaint relating to cheating and forgery have been made out.

“We will not say whether the political party is religion-based. It is for the EC to say so and cancel the registration of the political party or its symbol. We will restrict ourselves to the complaint,” the Court said before reserving orders.

The top court heard arguments advanced by senior advocates KV Vishwanathan and RS Cheema, who appeared for Badals and senior SAD leader Daljit Singh Cheema. They were aggrieved by an order of the Punjab and Haryana high court passed in August 2021, refusing to set aside the criminal complaint filed against them by a Hoshiarpur resident Balwant Singh Khera. The HC even refused to stay the summoning order issued to them by the additional chief judicial magistrate, Hoshiarpur on November 4, 2019.

The complaint filed in 2009 alleged that SAD gave a false undertaking before the Election Commission in 1989, claiming to bear “true faith and allegiance to the principles of secularism” which is an essential requirement under Section 29-A of the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951 for any outfit seeking recognition as a political party.

Khera alleged in his complaint that a “forged and fabricated constitution” of the party was filed before the EC with a view to “defraud the citizens of India”, as the same outfit had filed its constitution with the Gurdwara Election Commission in 2003, where it claimed to be a religious outfit allowing membership only to adult Sikh males and females alone.

The Badals argued that being religious was not a restriction on being secular as an individual may belong to a religious group yet keep an outlook that accepts and respects all religious beliefs. Vishwanathan argued that the SAD was entitled to contest the gurudwara elections as well since the election relates to the management of secular aspects relating to the gurdwara administration. He further argued that Prakash Singh Badal was not named in the original complaint and two attempts to rope him in were refused by the trial court. Yet in the summoning order, his name was included.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan appeared for Khera and submitted that a false claim was made by SAD before the EC to get party registration. The constitution was amended only later in June 2004, to incorporate the provisions of Section 29-A of the RP Act. He further argued that the Constitution of India does not contemplate a party to be religious and political simultaneously, adding, “A false claim has been made to deceive EC, which amounts to forgery.”

The bench remarked, “They submitted the Constitution of 1989 so where is the question of forgery? Making a false document or a false claim is essential for forgery to be made out. They have not submitted any forged or fabricated document.” It further noted, “This battle has to be elsewhere, not in a criminal court.”

In their petition filed through law firm Karanjawala & Co, the Badals said the complainant (Khera) was consistently trying to derecognise SAD in civil proceedings between 2004 and 2008 before the EC against which an appeal is pending before the Delhi high court. In November, the top court stayed further proceedings before the trial court.

The complaint filed before the Hoshiarpur court sought prosecution of the accused under offences of forgery (Sections 463, 465, 466, 467, 471), forgery for purpose of cheating (Section 468), cheating (Section 420) and fabricating false evidence (Sections 191, 192) of the Indian Penal Code.