False declarations / false evidence — what the RO may and may not investigate

Rajasthan ULB General Election 2026 · Order 793 dated 20.01.2026 · scrutiny — member 01.09 · Chairperson 17.09

Why this file exists. This order sits in the Commission's own Compendium at item 43, printed pp. 158–159 — and not one word of it appeared in any of our modules. I read both pages myself.

🚨 This will come up at the scrutiny table directly — "this candidate has lied, please investigate" — and the order sets out exactly what the RO may examine and what they may not.

1. The order's identity card

⚠️ There are two different "502"s — never mix them

Order	Date	Subject	Status
502	02.06.1999	children declaration	🔴 rescinded by order 4977 (21.07.2026) → §4-क
502	29.03.2011	action on false evidence	🔴 superseded by order 793 (20.01.2026) — this file

🚨 One number, two documents. Never write or say "502" without its date.

2. 🔴 The biggest point — not the IPC any more, the BNS

The order itself writes the substitution in brackets —

"…under sections 191 and 193 of the Indian Penal Code (sections 227 and 229 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, the new Act), treating it as false evidence, all District Election Officers were directed to file a complaint in the competent court."

🎯 Say exactly this in training: "IPC 191/193 no longer — BNS 2023 sections 227 and 229." If an old deck or note says IPC, it is out of date. 🔗 This is the same class of point already recorded in the citation-defects register about the repealed IPC 171-F in Annexure-9.

3. 🚨 The order's four directions — this is what to teach

(i) 🔴 Pre-election disqualification shall not be investigated

"The candidate's pre-election disqualification shall not be investigated, that is, it shall not be examined whether the candidate did or did not hold any disqualification before the election, because that point can be included only in an election petition."

(ii) ✅ For the RO and DEO the point of inquiry can be only this

"…whether the candidate, with the intention of contesting the election, made any false statement in the nomination papers and the other forms / affidavits / declarations submitted with them, or deliberately concealed facts, and whether he thereby committed the offence of giving false evidence to the Returning Officer. Inquiry may be made on these points alone, but even in such proceedings the candidate's pre-election ineligibility shall not be examined."

(iii) If false evidence is made out — a complaint in the criminal court

"…by the Returning Officer before whom the candidate presented the false evidence, or by any other officer nominated by the District Election Officer … on a prima facie finding of false evidence from the inquiry into the facts, arrangements shall be made to file a complaint in the competent court under sections 227 and 229 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023."

(iv) Who must not conduct the inquiry, and why not refer to the State Government

"…the inquiry shall not be got done from any officer of the Panchayati Raj institutions, but the facts shall be inquired into only by the Returning Officer or an officer nominated by the District Election Officer … There is no need to refer the matter to the State Government."

4. ✅ In one table — may / may not

🚨 This limit does not cut down the power of scrutiny — be clear about this

The RO's power under the rules to reject a nomination on the face of the papers at scrutiny stands exactly as it is. Order 793 is not about that power at all.

Order 793 is about the separate situation where a complaint is made that "the candidate contested by presenting false facts" — and there the scope of inquiry is confined to the false statement only, not to the disqualification.

⚠️ Do not conflate the two. Conflating them ends either in a valid nomination being rejected or an invalid one being accepted.

5. The background the order gives for itself

⚠️ One thing I should make explicit. The provisions named in the order's recital (s. 43 of the Panchayati Raj Act · rule 80 of the PR (Election) Rules 1994 · s. 39 · rule 23 of the PR Rules 1996) are Panchayat provisions. The corresponding municipal provisions are different. 🚨 But the order's own subject says "municipalities and Panchayati Raj institutions", and directions (i)–(iv) are addressed generally to the RO/DEO — which is why they apply to municipalities. ➡ For the election-petition route in a municipality, look to its own Act and Rules — do not quote the Panchayat section numbers in class.

6. 🚨 For the Balotra RO/ARO — three sentences

Source: Order 793 dated 20.01.2026 — Compendium item 43, printed pp. 158–159, both pages read first-hand How it was found: matching the Compendium's 85 orders against our material (23.08.2026) — it was among the 24 that no module had ever cited Hindi parallel: गलत घोषणा-पत्र / मिथ्या साक्ष्य — RO क्या कर सकता है, क्या नहीं Related: बालोतरा जिला — प्रशिक्षण पैक · DLMT Training Material — Correction Sheet · Supersession register — which order replaces which · DEO_QUESTIONS_en · Stale and defective citations in the official sources — a single register