SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2001 Supreme(Pat) 1123

SHASHANK KR.SINGH, RAVI S.DHAVAN
Suo Motu Action By The High Court – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar – Respondent


Judgment

1. This is a matter which deals with criminals in politics at the grassroot level. The State Government had been directed by the Court to place a list of Mukhiyas who may have been convicted of an offence, or for that matter, were inherently disqualified under law so as not to be the members of Panchayats, information being given to the Court is coming slowly. This aspect the Court will leave for later.

2. Sooner or later the question will arise that if there be information, as a fact, that certain members of Panchayats have indeed been convicted, then, what is to be done. Plainly, this is a matter where a member of a Panchayat may be disqualified for being part of it. Does the Constitution of India give any guidance on such situations? It does. As amended, Part IX, the Chapter. The Panchayat, Art. 243-F does mention disqualification for membership. This Article also casts an obligation on the State Government that the law must provide for taking care of such situations. The next question is has the law so framed by the State Legislature provided for such a situation? The answer is it has. Sub-sec. (2) of sec. 139 under the sub-head "Disqualification" clearly mentions that












Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top