Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings Against Sukhbir Singh Badal and Others

The case of Sukhbir Singh Badal & Ors. vs. Balwant Singh Khera & Ors. revolves around allegations of forgery, cheating, and conspiracy concerning the registration of the Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) as a political party. The Supreme Court of India ruled on the validity of the criminal proceedings initiated against prominent political figures, including Parkash Singh Badal, Sukhbir Singh Badal, and Dr. Daljit Singh Cheema. The Court ultimately quashed the proceedings, holding that the charges were unfounded and constituted an abuse of process.

Background of the Case

The case originated from a private complaint filed by Balwant Singh Khera in 2009 before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (ACJM), Hoshiarpur. The complaint alleged that the affidavit submitted by the SAD to the Election Commission of India (ECI) for registration under Section 29-A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 was false and inconsistent with the party’s declaration before the Gurudwara Election Commission (GEC).

The complaint claimed that SAD falsely declared allegiance to secularism in its affidavit to the ECI, whereas under the Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925, the party had religious objectives, restricting its membership to Sikhs. The complainant argued that this amounted to filing a forged document and committing fraud on the ECI to gain recognition as a political party.

Legal Issues Before the Court

Whether the allegations in the complaint made out a case of forgery, cheating, and conspiracy under Sections 420, 465, 466, 467, 468, and 471 read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Whether the alleged contradiction between the affidavits submitted to the ECI and GEC amounted to a criminal offense.
Whether the High Court of Punjab and Haryana erred in upholding the summoning order of the trial court.

Arguments by the Petitioner (Appellants)

The appellants, including Parkash Singh Badal, Sukhbir Singh Badal, and Dr. Daljit Singh Cheema, challenged the High Court’s decision and argued that:

“The complaint is politically motivated and was filed belatedly after 20 years of the party’s registration.”
“The registration of SAD was already challenged before the ECI and dismissed in 2008.”
“There is no evidence of forgery or cheating, as no false documents were created or presented.”
“The concept of secularism does not require a party to forgo religious beliefs while engaging in political activities.”
“Even if the party’s Constitution differs for the GEC and ECI, it does not constitute a criminal offense.”

Arguments by the Respondent (Complainant)

The complainant, Balwant Singh Khera, argued that:

“SAD submitted a false affidavit to the ECI, falsely claiming adherence to secularism.”
“The party’s Constitution submitted to the GEC restricts membership to Sikhs, contradicting its secular claim before the ECI.”
“The actions of SAD amount to fraud, cheating, and forgery under the IPC.”
“The High Court correctly upheld the summoning order as a prima facie case was made out.”

Supreme Court’s Analysis and Judgment

The Supreme Court carefully examined the allegations and evidence, making the following key observations:

“There is no evidence of forgery or the creation of false documents. The affidavits submitted to the ECI and GEC were not fabricated or forged.”
“A political party can maintain religious beliefs while still adhering to secular principles. The management of religious institutions is a secular function under Indian law.”
“Mere inconsistency in affidavits does not constitute a criminal offense under Sections 420, 465, 466, 467, 468, and 471 IPC.”
“The complaint was filed 20 years after the party’s registration, making it an abuse of process.”
“Criminal law cannot be used as a tool for political vendetta.”

The Court concluded that the summoning order was legally unsustainable and quashed the criminal proceedings. The judgment emphasized:

“Continuing the criminal proceedings against the appellants would be nothing but an abuse of the process of law and the court.”

Key Takeaways from the Judgment

Political parties can have religious beliefs and still function within the framework of secularism.
Forgery and cheating require the creation of false documents, which was not proven in this case.
Delayed complaints without substantive evidence may be considered an abuse of process.
The Supreme Court has reaffirmed the role of judicial review in preventing frivolous litigation.

Impact of the Judgment

This ruling sets a precedent on the interplay between political parties’ religious affiliations and their commitment to secularism under the Constitution. It also reinforces the principle that criminal law cannot be misused for political vendetta. The Supreme Court’s decision ensures that legal proceedings must be based on concrete evidence and not speculative or politically motivated allegations.

Petitioner Name: Sukhbir Singh Badal, Parkash Singh Badal, Dr. Daljit Singh Cheema.
Respondent Name: Balwant Singh Khera & Ors..
Judgment By: Justice M.R. Shah, Justice C.T. Ravikumar.
Place Of Incident: Punjab.
Judgment Date: 28-04-2023.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: sukhbir-singh-badal,-vs-balwant-singh-khera-supreme-court-of-india-judgment-dated-28-04-2023.pdf

Directly Download Judgment: Directly download this Judgment

See all petitions in Fraud and Forgery
See all petitions in Bail and Anticipatory Bail
See all petitions in Criminal Defamation
See all petitions in Extortion and Blackmail
See all petitions in Attempt to Murder Cases
See all petitions in Judgment by Mukeshkumar Rasikbhai Shah
See all petitions in Judgment by C.T. Ravikumar
See all petitions in allowed
See all petitions in Quashed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments April 2023
See all petitions in 2023 judgments

See all posts in Criminal Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category