ORDER

I have already heard the learned counsel for the parties.

2. The present writ application has been preferred by the petitioner for quashing the order dated 12.01.2024 passed by respondent no.2 in Case No.72 of 2023, for quashing the order dated 21.02.2024 passed by respondent no.2 in Case No.13 of 2024, including directing the Respondents-Authorities for reinstatement of the petitioner to the post of Adhyakash of Zila Parishad, Khagaria, among other reliefs.

3. The petitioner Smt. Krishna Kumari Yadav was elected as a member of Khagaria Zila Parishad on 4th November, 2021. She was elected as the Adhyaksh of the Zila Parishad, Khagaria on 28.12.2021. She was convicted on 07.10.2023 by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-1st, Khagaria in Khagaria P.S.Case No. 637 of 2005 under Section 387/120(B) of the IPC. Her husband was also convicted under the same sections of the IPC. The petitioner and her husband were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and a fine of Rs. 10,000/- was also imposed on them.

4. Since the conviction was for a period of more than six months, the State Election Commissioner (respondent no.2) declared her as disqualified vide order dated 12.01.2024, under the provisions of Section 136(1)(g) of Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006, hereinafter to be referred to as ‘the Act of 2006’. This order was passed on the application of respondent no.8 Smt. Nikita Kumari. Her application was registered as Case No. 72 of 2023.

Section 136(1)(g) of ‘the Act of 2006’ is being extracted hereinbelow:—

“136. Disqualification for Membership.—(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, a person shall be disqualified for election or after election for holding the post as Mukhiya, member of the Gram Panchayat, Sarpanch, Panch of the Gram Katchahri, member of the Panchayat Samit and member of Zila Parishad, if such person-

…....(g) has been sentenced by a criminal court whether within or out of India to imprisonment for an offence, other than a political offence, for a term exceeding six months or has been ordered to furnish security for good behavior under Section 109 or Section 110 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act 2, 1974) and such sentence or order not having subsequently been reversed”.

5. Against the order of conviction and sentence, the petitioner preferred Criminal Appeal No.18 of 2023 in the court of Sessions Judge, Khagaria, which is still pending. Prior to filing of the said criminal appeal, a petition for interim bail and suspension of sentence was moved by the petitioner before the learned trial court. The learned trial court allowed the application. Accordingly, the petitioner furnished the interim bail bond, which was later on confirmed by the appellate court. Since only sentence was suspended, and not the conviction, the petitioner filed an application before the appellate court on 19.10.2023 with a prayer to stay the conviction. The appellate court (Sessions Judge, Khagaria) rejected that application on 02.12.2023. Being aggrieved by that order, the petitioner preferred Cr.Misc.No. 406 of 2024 before this Court. The coordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 31.01.2024, stayed the conviction of the petitioner till the next date of hearing which was 11.03.2024, but the coordinate Bench vacated the stay order dated 31.01.2024, vide order 17.05.2024. While vacating the order of stay against the conviction, the coordinate Bench of this Court observed that at the time of hearing on the stay application on 31.01.2024, it was argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner would stand disqualified had the order not been stayed, but as a matter of fact, she was already disqualified vide order dated 12.01.2024 passed by the State Election Commissioner. Being aggrieved by the order vacating the stay, the petitioner preferred Special Leave to Appeal (Crl) No.7964/2024 before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The Hon’ble Supreme Court pleased to stay the operation