New Twist in Surajgarh Fake High Court Order Case as Bank Manager Claims MLA Son Sent Document A Punjab National Bank senior manager approached Surajgarh police in Jhunjhunu claiming he forwarded an alleged fake High Court order to the SDM at the request of MLA Shravan Kumar after receiving it from his son. A major development has emerged in the alleged fake High Court order controversy linked to the Panchayati Raj elections in Rajasthan's Jhunjhunu district. Ramesh Bhookar, a senior manager at Punjab National Bank, personally presented himself at the Surajgarh police station on Friday and assured officials of his complete cooperation in the ongoing probe. Speaking to the media, the bank manager claimed that the questionable court document was originally sent to him on WhatsApp by Jaiprakash, the son of Surajgarh MLA Shravan Kumar. Bhookar stated that he forwarded the message to SDM Sandeep Choudhary on the direct instructions of the MLA without reading its contents. Timeline of the WhatsApp Messages Ramesh Bhookar, who has previously served in Chirawa and Jhunjhunu as a senior manager with Punjab National Bank, shared a precise chronological breakdown of how the message was transmitted. He revealed that he received the alleged High Court document from Jaiprakash's mobile phone at 3:14 PM. Exactly one minute later, at 3:15 PM, he forwarded the file to Surajgarh SDM Sandeep Choudhary. To follow up, he dispatched another brief message stating 'Please check' to the SDM at 3:16 PM. Bhookar explained that Congress MLA Shravan Kumar was physically present with him when these events unfolded. The lawmaker was reportedly deeply anxious about his son Jaiprakash's electoral matter and was trying to establish phone contact with the SDM. The bank official clarified that he had no prior acquaintance with SDM Sandeep Choudhary nor did he possess the official's contact number beforehand. According to Bhookar, it was MLA Shravan Kumar who provided the SDM's phone number and instructed him to forward the file received from Jaiprakash. Call Records and Police Investigation The bank official further claimed that MLA Shravan Kumar was actively speaking to the SDM on the phone around the same time. He noted that an examination of the call detail records would easily verify these phone conversations. Bhookar added that either the MLA or his son Jaiprakash might have informed the SDM in advance that a message would be arriving from the bank manager's phone number. Reaffirming his stance, Bhookar stated that he voluntarily visited the police station to assist investigators in uncovering the truth behind the fake order. Background of the Alleged Fake Court Order The controversy stems from an election dispute involving Jaiprakash, the son of Surajgarh MLA Shravan Kumar. Jaiprakash had filed a legal challenge after his name was removed from the voter list of Ward Number 5 in Gram Panchayat Jeeni, under the Surajgarh Panchayat Samiti. Subsequently, a purported judicial order was delivered via WhatsApp to the returning officer and SDM Sandeep Choudhary. The document stated that the High Court had directed the immediate restoration of Jaiprakash's name on the voter roll and granted him authorization to submit nomination papers to contest the Panchayati Raj elections. However, official verification revealed that the document was fabricated. Records showed that on October 16, the High Court had merely instructed that the petition be listed for a hearing on October 27. The court had not issued any interim relief restoring the candidate's name or permitting him to contest the election. Police and administrative authorities are now actively investigating who created the bogus court document and circulated it. Ramesh Bhookar reiterated his commitment to support the police in their investigation. What this means for you This incident highlights critical concerns regarding administrative security and the misuse of fake documents during election processes. • Across India: The proliferation of fake court orders sent digitally poses a significant threat to the integrity of public administration. Citizens and officials are advised to cross-check digital legal documents through official judicial portals before taking action. • In Rajasthan: Administrative scrutiny over voter list modifications and nomination submissions during local body elections is expected to tighten significantly. Authorities are likely to enforce stricter measures against the creation and distribution of fraudulent judicial orders. • Administrative Protocol: Returning officers and sub-divisional magistrates will now enforce mandatory verification protocols for any court orders delivered electronically. This prevents unauthorized administrative actions based on unverified digital communications. • Legal Accountability: Individuals forwarding unverified legal claims or forged documents may face police scrutiny and legal action. Members of the public should refrain from sharing unconfirmed administrative orders on messaging platforms. Why this happened This controversy arose from an urgent attempt to restore a candidate's deleted name on the voter list during local body elections. • Voter Roll Removal: The candidate's name was struck off the voter list of Ward Number 5 in Gram Panchayat Jeeni, threatening his eligibility to contest the local election. A legal petition was subsequently filed in court. • High Court Hearing Schedule: On October 16, the High Court did not grant any immediate interim relief or restoration, opting instead to schedule the matter for a routine hearing on October 27. • Creation of Forged Document: Facing strict election deadlines, a fake judicial order was fabricated to mislead election officers into granting immediate authorization for nomination filing. • Digital Transmission: The fraudulent document was dispatched via WhatsApp to the returning officer to bypass standard verification channels, which led to the bank manager forwarding it upon request. Questions & Answers 1. What claim did the bank manager make before the police in the fake High Court order case? Bank Manager Ramesh Bhookar claimed that the alleged fake High Court order was sent to him on WhatsApp by MLA Shravan Kumar's son Jaiprakash, and he forwarded it to the SDM without reading it on the MLA's instructions. 2. At what times were the WhatsApp messages forwarded? Ramesh Bhookar received the message at 3:14 PM, forwarded it to the SDM at 3:15 PM, and sent a follow-up message stating 'Please check' at 3:16 PM. 3. What did the High Court actually order on October 16? On October 16, the High Court merely instructed that the petition be listed for hearing on October 27, without granting any interim relief or permitting election participation. 4. Which election and region does this dispute pertain to? This dispute pertains to the Panchayati Raj elections in Ward Number 5 of Gram Panchayat Jeeni, under the Surajgarh Panchayat Samiti in Rajasthan's Jhunjhunu district. https://trendkia.com/en/rajasthan/surajgarh-pharji-haikorta-adesha-vivada-men-naya-mora-bainka-prabndhaka-ne-vidhayaka-ke-putra-para-lagaya-maiseja-bhejane-ka-aropa-57084 TrendKia — Har trend, sabse pehle.