[Sena Vs Sena] Shiv Sena (Uddhav) Leader Moves HC Against Ravindra Waikar's Lok Sabha Win By 48 Votes

Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!

Kirtikar’s lawyer, Karande, is expected to bring up different points before Justice NJ Jamadar’s bench next week.

[Sena vs Sena] Shiv Sena (Uddhav) Leader Moves HC Against Ravindra Waikar's Lok Sabha Win by 48 votes — [Sena vs Sena] Shiv Sena (Uddhav) Leader Moves HC Against Ravindra Waikar’s Lok Sabha Win by 48 votes

Mumbai: On Tuesday (16th July): Shiv Sena (UBT) candidate Amol Kirtikar, who narrowly lost the Lok Sabha elections to Shiv Sena (Eknath Shinde faction) leader Ravindra Waikar by 48 votes, has taken his case to the Bombay High Court. He is seeking to invalidate Waikar’s election and declare himself the rightful winner.

The petition highlights alleged irregularities and violations of prescribed procedures at the counting center. Kirtikar’s legal representation, led by advocate Amit Karande, emphasizes a significant discrepancy between the officially announced votes and those recorded and verified by his counting agents.

Kirtikar’s plea, filed through advocate Amit Karande, raises concerns about discrepancies and failures to adhere to established norms at the counting center. It highlights a significant difference between the votes officially announced and those recorded and verified by Kirtikar’s election agents at the counting tables.

The petition also highlighted that a request for a vote recount was allegedly swiftly dismissed without due regard for statutory guidelines. Kirtikar narrowly lost to Waikar by just 48 votes, with Waikar receiving 4,52,644 votes compared to Kirtikar’s 4,52,596.

“The petitioner is aggrieved by the improper acceptance of void votes allegedly cast by 333 impersonators instead of legitimate voters, and the alleged breach of rules and directives during the counting process by Election Commission officials, significantly impacting the election outcome,”

the plea stated.

The plea, filed by advocate Amit A Karande, argues that Waikar’s election should be declared void due to significant irregularities that allegedly affected the outcome. These include the improper reception of votes, particularly highlighting 333 uncounted tendered votes.

Furthermore, the petition alleges serious breaches of statutory rules and orders by the Returning Officer (RO) during the counting process:

Kirtikar’s counting agents were allegedly denied their statutory right to sit at the RO tables.
Form 17-C (Part II) documenting the results of counting was reportedly not provided in 839 polling booths.
Kirtikar’s request for a vote recount was swiftly rejected.
Unauthorized use of mobile phones was observed in the counting area.
There were allegations of impersonation of electors.
Discrepancies were noted in the recording of tendered votes.

As a remedy, the petition seeks to annul Waikar’s election and declare Kirtikar as the rightful winner.

It further alleged that the returning officer displayed undue haste and arbitrary behavior during the vote counting. Kirtikar also requested the court to review video recordings of the entire counting process as part of his case.

Kirtikar’s lawyer, Karande, is expected to bring up these points before Justice NJ Jamadar’s bench next week.