The Rajasthan High Court has rejected a plea by the state government to withdraw a criminal case against BJP MLA Harlal Saharan, who is accused of using a forged Class 10th certificate to get elected.

The Rajasthan High Court rejected the State government’s request to withdraw a forgery case against BJP MLA Harlal Saharan. The Court said such serious cases involving misuse of public office cannot be dropped for political reasons.

JAIPUR: The Rajasthan High Court dismissed the application filed by the State government seeking permission to withdraw a criminal case against Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) MLA Harlal Saharan, also known as Harlal Singh.

The matter came up before a Division Bench consisting of Justice Inderjeet Singh and Justice Bhuwan Goyal.

The Bench clearly observed that the government had not submitted the required report of the Public Prosecutor showing satisfaction for withdrawal of the case, nor had it given proper reasons for such a decision.

The case has been pending since 2019. It is alleged that Saharan submitted a forged Class X mark-sheet and certificate at the time of filing his nomination papers for the Zila Parishad elections.

The Court highlighted that the withdrawal of such a case could not be allowed merely because the accused is an elected legislator.

The judges remarked:

“It is noteworthy that as per allegations, accused fabricated mark-sheet of Class X, on the basis of which, he submitted nomination papers for contesting the election of Member, Zila Parishad, in which he was declared elected and held the public office and utilized public money. Such matters of a gruesome crime involving misuse of public office and public money do not warrant withdrawal of prosecution merely on the ground of good public image of an accused or that he is elected Member of Legislative Assembly.”

The High Court further noted that the trial court had already taken cognizance of the offences and had framed charges against Saharan.

Not only this, but a revision petition challenging that cognizance order had also been dismissed by the High Court itself in 2023.

While rejecting the government’s plea, the Court pointed out:

“Advocate General has not been able to satisfy the Court as to how broad ends of public justice, public order and peace would met in withdrawing the prosecution nor has he satisfied that present application has been made in good faith and in the interest of public policy and justice and not to thwart of stifle the process of law.”

Earlier, Advocate General Rajendra Prasad argued on behalf of the State that even though a chargesheet had been filed against Saharan, there was no strong material available on record.

He also said that the charges framed against the MLA were not correct.

However, the Court held that permission for withdrawal of prosecution cannot be granted in a routine or mechanical manner.

Therefore, the Bench dismissed the plea of the State government.

• Advocate General Rajendra Prasad along with advocate Tanya Goyal appeared for the State.

• Advocates Ramawatar Singh, Jassa Ram, and Jai Kishan represented the complainant.

CASE TITLE:State of Rajasthan v Chimna Ram