JUDGMENT : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J. 1. On 02.03.2020, after hearing the learned Advocates for the respective sides, I had passed the following order:- “1. The petitioner has been disqualified by the order dated 18.12.2019, by which, the Additional Divisional Commissioner has concluded that 2 biological children (twins) born to the petitioner and her husband Nagnath Patil, on 30.03.2005, have been suppressed by the petitioner. 2. I have considered the submissions of the learned Advocates for the petitioner and respondent No. 1. The learned AGP causes an appearance on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 and 3. 3. The petitioner discloses her biological children as under:- (1) First girl child Manisha is born on 07.08.1994. (2) The second girl child Ashwini is born on 08.01.1996. (3) A male child Amit was born on 09.02.1998. (4) Twins, a girl and male child each, Amar and Sima are born in the same delivery on 10.12.2000. 4. The cut-of date for restraining the birth of children beyond two, is 12.09.2000 as per the judgment of the Full Bench in the matter of Subhash Sajesingh Gavit vs. The Returning Officer, ZP, Nandurbar and Others in WP No. 6993/2008 with WP No. 6994/2008, decided on 17.10.2019, which carves out an exception with regard to preordained pregnancy. 5. A dispute with regard to the number of children, is in the context of twins having been born on 30.03.2005 to the petitioner, a girl and male child each, Avinash and Ayodhya. The learned Advocate for the petitioner submits on instructions and pleads in the memo of the petition that these twins are not the petitioner’s biological children and she does not know who are these persons and their whereabouts. The petitioner is ready to file an affidavit on the next date declaring that these two children are not her biological children. She is willing to undergo a DNA test if these two children are produced and if the DNA of the petitioner and her husband matches with these two children, both are willing to deposit an amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- each in this Court as costs and are willing to face permanent disqualification as well as criminal prosecution. 6. The learned Advocate for respondent No. 1 submits that the above mentioned two children are actually taking education in the Poddar School at Latur, under the changed names of Laxman Nagnath Patil and Laxmi Nagnath Patil. 5,00,000/- each in this Court as costs and are willing to face permanent disqualification as well as criminal prosecution. 6. The learned Advocate for respondent No. 1 submits that the above mentioned two children are actually taking education in the Poddar School at Latur, under the changed names of Laxman Nagnath Patil and Laxmi Nagnath Patil. He, therefore, contends that Avinash Nagnath Patil is alias Laxman Nagnath Patil and Ayodhya Nagnath Patil is @ Laxmi Nagnath Patil. He submits on instructions that if his complaint turns out to be false, he will deposit Rs. 5,00,000/- as costs in this Court and will also face criminal prosecution. He is willing to file an affidavit to this extent. 7. Considering the above, the petitioner as well as respondent No. 1 are put to notice as under:- (a) The petitioner and her husband and respondent No. 1 would file an affidavit in this Court on 07.03.2020 stating as above that they are willing to face penal action as noted above and would also be subjected to costs of Rs. 5,00,000/- each if their contention turns out to be false. (b) If the two children Avinash @ Laxman Nagnath Patil and Ayodhya @ Laxmi Nagnath Patil are produced before this Court, a DNA test of the petitioner and her husband and the two children would be directed by this Court. (c) If either of the sides are held to have played a fraud on this Court, no apology would be entertained and there shall be no forgiveness. (d) List this petition on 07.03.2020 for recording the stand that these parties would take before this Court. 8. Considering the above and keeping in view that two children namely Avinash @ Laxman Nagnath Patil and Ayodhya @ Laxmi Nagnath Patil are to be traced out and are said to be taking education in the Poddar School at Latur, I deem it appropriate to direct the District Supdt. of Police, Latur to immediately embark upon a physical search for the two children by interrogating persons or relatives of the petitioner as he may deem ft and proper and shall follow all lawful methods for carrying out such interrogation and shall endeavour to produce the two children before this Court on 07.03.2020 at 10.30 a.m. 9. The petitioner and her husband shall remain present in this Court on 07.03.2020. 10. The petitioner and her husband shall remain present in this Court on 07.03.2020. 10. The parties shall act on the print out copy of this order obtained from the official website of the Bombay High Court. 11. The petitioner, her husband and respondent No. 1 are granted one opportunity before fling their individual affidavits, to reconsider their stand and if they want to resile from their stand, they would be at liberty to make a statement before this Court on 07.03.2020. However, this Court would consider the quantum of costs to be imposed on these parties. 12. Stand over to 07.03.2020 in the Urgent admissions/Supplementary board.” 2. The learned AGP submits that Police Inspector Sanjeevan Mirkale, In-charge Officer, Police Station MIDC, Latur is present in the Court and he has produced the twin siblings Master Laxman and Miss Laxmi before the Court. He has tendered a report dated 06.02.2020 to the office of the Government Pleader alongwith certified documents (37 pages). The said report and the documents are taken on record and collectively marked as ‘X’ for identification. 3. The learned Advocate for the Petitioner elected representative and her husband Shri Nagnath Patil, who are present in the Court, submits that both are tendering an apology and desire to withdraw this petition. Both are repentant for having attempted to abuse the process of law. 4. During the hearing of this matter today, another disturbing feature is revealed. There are certain birth certificates issued by the health department. There are five birth certificates issued by the Birth Death Registering Officer Gram Panchayat Korali, Taluka Nilanga, District Latur which are annexed to the petition paper book from page Nos. 44 to 48. All these birth certificates have been issued on a single day, which is 22.12.2016. The birth certificates pertaining to the children of the Petitioner and her husband are as under:- (a) Miss. Manisha Nagnath Patil was born on 07.08.1994. (b) Miss Ashwini Nagnath Patil was born on 08.01.1996. (c) Amit Nagnath Patil was born on 09.02.1998. (d) Twins, Master Amar Nagnath Patil and Miss Sima Nagnath Patil are born on 10.12.2000. 5. The compilation of documents at ‘X’ placed before me today indicate from the certificates issued by Sant Tukaram National Model School, Latur and Kripa Sadan Convent Primary School, Latur that the twins by name Master Laxman Nagnath Patil and Miss Laxmi Nagnath Patil are born on 24.06.2006. 5. The compilation of documents at ‘X’ placed before me today indicate from the certificates issued by Sant Tukaram National Model School, Latur and Kripa Sadan Convent Primary School, Latur that the twins by name Master Laxman Nagnath Patil and Miss Laxmi Nagnath Patil are born on 24.06.2006. These are the two children who were very boldly disowned by the Petitioner mother on the ground that there are no children born to her after December 2000. 6. I called upon the learned Advocate for the Petitioner to collect instructions from the parents present in the Court as to where is Master Amar and Miss Sima, who are said to be born on 10.12.2000. It is shocking to note that the parents have instructed the learned Advocate in the open Court to say that no child by name Amar and Sima are born. Amar is actually Laxman and Sima is actually Laxmi. The school record, right from the First Standard till March 2020 (2 Schools), indicates that Laxman and Laxmi are born on 24.06.2006. 7. This establishes that the husband of the Petitioner has approached the Registrar - Birth-Death Registering Officer for obtaining five birth certificates on a single day. It is apparent that there are manipulations done by the husband of the Petitioner and these three children are shown to have been born with a gap of two years in 1994, 1996 and 1998 and the twins, who are actually Laxman and Laxmi born on 24.06.2006, are shown to be Amar and Sima, born on 10.12.2000. 8. The learned Advocate for the Petitioner has pleaded before the Court that the Petitioner, as well as, her husband may be pardoned. I find that the said request does not deserve to be entertained since the husband of the Petitioner appears to have manipulated the birth records of his children in the reverse order by pushing back their dates of birth after obtaining five birth certificates on a single day. There appears to be mens rea and a systematic planning in what has been done. It would be a mockery of law and justice to pardon such litigants, who have not only abused the process of law, but have shown scant respect for the majesty of law and have manipulated even Government Officials. 9. There appears to be mens rea and a systematic planning in what has been done. It would be a mockery of law and justice to pardon such litigants, who have not only abused the process of law, but have shown scant respect for the majesty of law and have manipulated even Government Officials. 9. Today, as the case stands before this Court, the Petitioner and her husband declared that Amar is actually Laxman and Sima is actually Laxmi. Their birth dates have been manipulated and their age has been increased by six years indicating them to be 19 years and 3 months today, when they are 13 years and 9 months old and both are studying presently in the 8th Standard. Such conduct of the Petitioner and her husband cannot be countenanced. 10. In view of the above, this petition is dismissed. The Petitioner Lalita Nagnath Patil is subjected to a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- which shall be deposited in this Court on or before 15.04.2020, failing which, this Court would initiate suo-moto contempt proceedings against her and would also direct the District Collector, Latur to initiate proceedings for recovery of Rs. 1,00,000/- with an additional fine of Rs. 50,000/- as arrears of land revenue. 11. The Kasar Sirsi Police Station, Taluka Nilanga, District Latur, shall register an FIR against Nagnath Basanna Patil at post Koraliwadi, Taluka Nilanga, District Latur for a fraud played in manipulating the records of the birth dates of the five children. The said offence shall be investigated and tried as is permissible under the Code of Criminal Procedure and for the offences punishable under the Indian Penal Code. 12. The District Health Officer is directed to locate the person, who had issued the five birth certificates on 22.12.2016 to Nagnath Basanna Patil and initiate disciplinary action against him for manipulation of records. Considering the seriousness of the act said to have been committed by him, the said authority shall consider commensurate strict action after finding out the concerned Registrar who is guilty of the said offence. The disciplinary action should be concluded within SIX MONTHS from today and compliance report shall be tendered to the Registrar (Judicial) of the Bombay High Court, Bench at Aurangabad. 13. The disciplinary action should be concluded within SIX MONTHS from today and compliance report shall be tendered to the Registrar (Judicial) of the Bombay High Court, Bench at Aurangabad. 13. Needless to state, as it is established that the Petitioner and her husband Nagnath Basanna Patil have five children, out of which two are born on 24.06.2006, both shall be disqualified from contesting any elections to which the disqualification for having more than two children after the cut of date is prescribed. 14. I deem it appropriate to record my appreciation for the steps taken promptly by the learned AGP Shri S.W. Munde and Dr. Rajendra Mane, District Superintendent of Police, Latur and Police Inspector Sanjeevan Mirkale, Incharge Officer, Police Station MIDC, Latur for the admirable act of having located the two children and having produced them before the Court.