SAD's dual constitution controversy: SC reserves judgment on a pleas by Badals

New Delhi, April 11 (IANS) The Supreme Court has reserved the judgment on a plea filed by Shiromani Akali Dal leaders Sukhbir Singh Badal, Parkash Singh Badal and Daljit Singh Cheema, challenging the proceedings pending before Punjab's Hoshiarpur court in the alleged case of forgery and cheating filed against them, in the controversy over the party's dual constitution.

After hearing submissions, a bench of Justices M.R. Shah and C.T. Ravikumar reserved the judgment on the petitions filed by Badals and Cheema, in connection with a complaint filed by Hoshiarpur resident Balwant Singh Khera. In 2009, Khera had filed a criminal complaint before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate.

The complaint accused SAD of submitting two different constitutions, i.e., one with the Gurdwara Election Commission (GEC) and the second with the Election Commission (EC) to seek recognition as a political party.

The criminal complaint was premised on the allegation that the party has claimed to be a secular party and given a declaration to abide by the principles of secularism in its constitution filed before the EC while it contests elections for a religious body, Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee, thereby being a religious party.

It was argued before the court that being religious does not run contrary to the principles of secularism and merely because a political outfit is contesting elections to a Gurdwara committee does not mean that it is not secular.

The petitioners contended that the criminal case with allegations of forgery and cheating over the constitution of the party filed before ECI and GEC, had no basis.

Senior advocates K.V. Viswanathan and R. S. Cheema appeared for the Badals, and advocate Sandeep Kapur appeared for Cheema. The petitions were filed by Karanjawala & Co. and the brief was led by Nandini Gore and Sandeep Kapur and others. Advocate Prashant Bhushan appeared for Balwant Singh Khera.

According to a counsel familiar with the development, the top court asked the counsel for the original complainant how the offences mentioned in the private complaint were made out in the instant case. The counsel further added the top court orally observed that prima facie offences of forgery, cheating, falsifications of documents etc., were not made out.

Counsel said the court also observed that whether SAD was a secular party or not was an issue that could not be gone into in the present proceedings and can only be decided by appropriate authorities like the Election Commission in a challenge before it.

Disclaimer: This story has not been edited by the Sakshi Post team and is auto-generated from syndicated feed.