SUKHDEV SINGH Vs. MUKHTIAR SINGH AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant challenges the order dated 31.08.2015 passed by the Election Tribunal-cum-Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Fatehgarh Sahib (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal'), whereby petitioner's election from the post of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Lullon, Block Bassi Pathana, District Fatehgarh Sahib was set aside. The Tribunal held that on account of embezzlement of money, a case had been registered against the petitioner and therefore decided issue No.1 against him and similarly also held that the election petition was maintainable.

(2.) The reasoning which prevailed with the Tribunal was that a case of embezzlement of Government grant had been registered against the petitioner. An inquiry had been conducted against the petitioner and he had been found guilty for committing embezzlement in grants in Gram Panchayat, Village Nanowal, Block Bassi Pathana while serving as Panchayat Secretary by conniving with Swaran Singh Sarpanch and the BDPO, Bassi Pathana. FIR No.159 dated 16.11.2009 had been registered against him on which he was on bail. It was accordingly noticed that a person could not be treated as guilty till the final decision given by the Court, but the petitioner by conniving with the officials had sought no objection certificate without any need for the same. The Returning Officer did not cancel the papers of the appellant. Resultantly, by placing reliance upon Section 208 (1) (i) of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, it was held that the appellant had not made the payment of the outstanding amounts to the Gram Panchayat and Zila Parishad and, therefore, could not be elected as a member.

(3.) Counsel for the appellant accordingly submitted that the said order is not sustainable as the case of the respondent/election petitioner was that on account of the pendency of criminal proceedings, the petitioner was thus not entitled to be elected and once it is found that the conviction had not been ordered by the criminal Court, mere pendency of the case could not be a ground to set aside the election.