Summary: Priti Manoj Bundile, a village leader (Sarpanch) from Amravati, lost her position because of bribery claims involving her husband. The High Court agreed with this decision, even though there were arguments about political rivalry and no direct proof against her.
Priti Manoj Bundile, chosen as the village leader in 2021, faced corruption claims when a complaint was made against her and her husband. They were accused under certain sections of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The complaint said her husband asked for a bribe to give an experience certificate, which Priti was supposed to provide as the leader.
On September 25, 2023, Rambhau Ganesh Mondhe filed a complaint. It said that Priti's husband asked for ₹4,000 for a certificate. A plan was made, and on September 27, 2023, her husband was caught taking the bribe. This led to an official charge against both Priti and her husband.
A village resident asked for Priti to be removed under a section of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959. The Additional Commissioner looked into the case and decided to disqualify her. Priti challenged this, but the Minister agreed with the disqualification.
Shri N.A. Gawande, Priti's lawyer, said there was no proof that Priti asked for or took a bribe. He claimed the charges were politically motivated and mentioned a past case where similar charges were dropped. He also said the process was unfair and didn't have proper hearings.
"Just because a report was filed doesn't mean there was any wrongdoing," argued Gawande.
The other side, including Assistant Government Lawyer Shri S.V. Narale, supported the disqualification. They argued that the bribe request was for something Priti was responsible for, suggesting she was involved.
Shri R.N. Ghuge, speaking for the village resident, stressed that the act was shameful and that she should be removed.
Justice Prafulla S. Khubalkar decided the disqualification was correct. The court noted that even though Priti didn't directly ask for the bribe, her husband's actions were connected to her job, suggesting her involvement.
"The petitioner's support of her husband's illegal actions is rightly seen as shameful behavior," said the judgment.
The High Court rejected Priti's appeal, confirming the decision to remove her from her position. This case shows the complicated nature of political roles and the consequences of being indirectly involved in corruption.
