In a notable legal turn, the Delhi High Court has suspended the summons issued to Sunita Kejriwal, wife of Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, amidst allegations of her holding two voter IDs. The original summons were a consequence of a complaint lodged by BJP leader Harish Khurana, asserting a breach of the Representation of the People Act, 1950.
Also read- Delhi High Court Upholds Individual’s Indelible Right To Marry By Choice (lawchakra.in)
Justice Amit Bansal of the Delhi High Court granted interim relief by staying the trial court’s order. The court’s directive was clear:
“Issue notice [in the petition]. In the meanwhile, there shall be a stay on the impugned order, till the next date of hearing,”
thus postponing any immediate legal obligations until the hearing on February 1, 2024.
The case against Sunita Kejriwal took shape following Khurana’s allegation that she was unlawfully registered to vote in both the Sahibabad constituency of Ghaziabad and Delhi’s Chandni Chowk. This act, if proven, would contravene Section 17 of the Representation of the People Act, which prohibits an individual from being registered in more than one constituency. Furthermore, Section 31 of the same act penalizes false declarations in voter registration.
The summons that brought this issue to the fore were issued by Metropolitan Magistrate Arjinder Kaur of Tis Hazari Courts on August 29, 2023. The magistrate had determined that there was a prima facie case against Sunita Kejriwal, stating,
“Hence, the accused be summoned accordingly,”
after considering the testimony of the complainant and other evidence.
In a countermove, Sunita Kejriwal approached the High Court, challenging the summons. Her defense, led by Senior Advocate Rebecca John, contested the basis of the summons. Advocate John emphasized the lack of evidence for a false declaration, stating,
“As per the Representation of People Act, an offence is made out only if a person submits a false declaration and in this case, Khurana has not placed on record anything that proves a false declaration was made.”
She further criticized the procedural handling of the complaint, asserting,
“This is a private complaint. The magistrate, before issuing summons, the least he could have done was check with the election commission.”
The case, formally recorded as SUNITA KEJRIWAL v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) AND ANR, has captured the public’s attention, spotlighting the legal intricacies of voter registration and the potential repercussions of alleged infractions. With the High Court’s stay, the proceedings are momentarily at a standstill, with the next developments anticipated in the upcoming year.
The political and legal communities are keenly observing the situation, as it involves the spouse of a significant political leader and the legal interpretation of electoral legislation. The forthcoming hearing’s verdict could set a precedent for how electoral laws are upheld and enforced.
Also read- Orissa High Court Sets Conditions For Speaker At Seminar, Upholds Communal Harmony (lawchakra.in)