While declaring the AAP candidate as the winner of the Chandigarh mayoral polls, the Supreme Court came down heavily on returning officer Anil Masih.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: Today, the Supreme Court proclaimed AAP councillor Kuldeep Kumar as the winner and new mayor of Chandigarh, while strongly rebuking returning officer Anil Masih and issuing him a show cause notice.
Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud, leading the Supreme Court bench, criticized Masih for
“unlawfully altering the course of the mayoral election”
and reprimanded him for providing false statements before the court. Masih had initially declared the BJP candidate as the victor of the Chandigarh mayoral polls on January 30, citing eight votes from the AAP-Congress coalition as “invalid.”
AAP’s Kuldeep Kumar secured 12 votes, while the BJP’s candidate, Manoj Sonkar, received 16 votes. This prompted AAP to accuse the returning officer of ballot tampering.
The Supreme Court, disapproving of Masih’s actions in defacing the votes, ordered the eight “invalid” votes to be regarded as valid, as they were cast in favor of the AAP.
ALSO READ: Supreme Court Orders Vote Recount in Chandigarh Mayor Polls, Says 8 Ballots Valid
SUPREME COURT REMARKS ON CHANDIGARH MAYORAL POLLS
- During the Chandigarh mayoral polls, the returning officer intentionally defaced eight ballots cast in favor of the petitioner. In his statement before this court on Monday, the officer claimed that he did so because he observed defacement on the ballots. However, it is evident that none of the ballots show any signs of defacement.
- The behavior of the presiding officer merits condemnation on two fronts. Firstly, his actions have unlawfully altered the trajectory of the mayoral election. Secondly, by making a statement containing a “patent falsehood” before this court, the officer must be held accountable for his actions.
- The returning officer cannot claim ignorance regarding the falsehood in his statement. Therefore, the judicial registrar is instructed to issue a show-cause notice to Anil Masih, compelling him to explain why disciplinary measures should not be taken against him.
- It is the solemn duty of the court to ensure the preservation of the electoral democratic process. The foundation of democracy rests on fundamental principles, and the court must intervene to safeguard the core mandate of electoral democracy.
- While there are flaws detected solely in the counting process, invalidating the entire election process would exacerbate the erosion of democratic principles caused by the presiding officer’s conduct. Therefore, setting aside the entire election process would be inappropriate.
CASE TITLE:
Kuldeep Kumar vs UT Chandigarh and ors.
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
