AMITAVA ROY,CJ - (1.) THE vires of Section 28(8) of the Rajasthan Cooperative Societies Act, 2001 (for short, hereafter referred to as "the Act ") as occasioned by the Rajasthan Cooperative Societies (Amendment) Act, 2013 (for short, hereafter referred to as "the Act of 2013 ") encounters impeachment for its nullity in the instant proceedings. The petitioner having been elected under the Act is presently holding the post of Chairman, Bharatpur Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., Bharatpur.
(2.) WE have heard Mr.R.N.Mathur, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and Mr.G.S.Bapna, learned Advocate General, Rajasthan for the respondent. The skeletal facts essential to outline the backdrop are that the petitioner had in the relevant election held in the year 2009 defeated her rival Smt.Kamlesh wife of Shri Chhattar Singh to be returned to the above office, whereafter, her opponent raised a dispute under the Act alleging that she (petitioner) was disqualified under section 28(8) of the Act to contest the election as at the relevant point of time, she had more than two children. The petitioner contested the proceedings contending that the allegations were frivolous and the same was disposed of by the award/decision dated 18.6.2010 passed under section 60 of the Act holding that the allegations were baseless. As a corollary, the petitioner was declared to be eligible to contest the election. According to the petitioner, this award/decision has since been challenged before the appellate forum, which is still sub judice.
(3.) IN this background, the husband of Smt.Kamlesh filed a criminal complaint on 12.7.2010 before the concerned court and the same was sent to the police under section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code. While contending that the complaint is conspicuously silent about the earlier proceedings culminating in the award/decision dated 18.6.2010, the petitioner has disclosed that it contained imputations for the offences under sections 466, 467, 468, 199, 420 and 120B IPC against her as well as her husband and brother in law and also the jurisdictional Additional District Education Officer. The petitioner has further stated that after investigation, the police has presented a closure report against which the husband of the defeated candidate has filed a protest petition. That vide order dated 16.11.2011, the jurisdictional Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offence under section 420 read with 120B IPC against her as well as her husband and her brother in law, has been mentioned by the petitioner. She has pleaded further that two revision petitions filed against the above order having been rejected by the jurisdictional Sessions Judge, proceedings under section 482 Cr.P.C. before this Court have been initiated and are pending.;