The Allahabad High Court dismissed a plea seeking Rahul Gandhi’s disqualification as an MP, stating his conviction was already stayed by the Supreme Court. The Court held that a stayed conviction cannot trigger disqualification under the Representation of the People Act.
Today, On 5th July, The Delhi High Court issued notices to Congress leaders Jairam Ramesh, Pawan Khera, and Ragini Nayak in response to journalist Rajat Sharma’s plea, alleging non-compliance with a directive to remove offensive social media posts. The court asked for an explanation and scheduled a further hearing. The controversy arose from allegations made during a television debate.
The Allahabad High Court postponed the hearing on a PIL challenging Rahul Gandhi’s Lok Sabha election, citing a prior 2016 directive requiring advocate Asok Pande to submit a Rs.25,000 Demand Draft with any plea. The Court called for a compliance report and set the next hearing for July 1, crucial for determining further steps in the case. The PIL questions Gandhi’s eligibility to hold office due to alleged citizenship and conviction issues.
The victories of imprisoned candidates Amritpal Singh and Sheikh Abdul Rashid have raised questions about their eligibility as Members of Parliament in India. Despite their wins in the Khadoor Sahib and Baramulla constituencies, their ability to serve in the Lok Sabha hinges on the legal framework and the implications of their criminal charges. If convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for two years, they will automatically lose their seats. Past cases indicate that incarcerated individuals have been granted permission to temporarily fulfill their elected duties, but the final decision will ultimately rest with the House. Singh, detained under the National Security Act (NSA), has been vocal about his initiatives against drug abuse in Punjab, while Rashid faces charges under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) and ran for election on an Awami Ittehad Party ticket.
Today (3rd June): Two BJP candidates, Pranat Tudu and Rekha Patra, along with party workers, approached the Calcutta High Court to address alleged false police complaints hindering their participation in vote counting for the Lok Sabha election. The court scheduled a hearing and also received petitions from BJP workers identifying themselves as party counting agents. The BJP has requested re-elections in 412 polling booths, alleging widespread election malpractices, and criticized the ruling Trinamool Congress for favoring tactics that led to clashes and injuries.
![[BREAKING] WB Governor Accused of Sexual Harassment | Does Article 361 Provides Immunity?](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/MicrosoftTeams-image-79.jpg?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
Allegations of sexual harassment against West Bengal’s Governor, CV Ananda Bose, by a staff member of Raj Bhavan have sparked a heated dispute. The Governor’s claim of immunity under Article 361 is being debated, drawing parallels to past cases. The Supreme Court has upheld absolute immunity for Governors, even in cases of personal misconduct. Such immunity was recognized in a 2017 case involving Kalyan Singh, and historical resignations have occurred amidst similar allegations.
Today(on 26th April), The Calcutta High Court has directed the NIA to investigate the recent clashes in Murshidabad during Ram Navami, considering transferring the case to the central agency. The court’s decision follows a report detailing the use of explosives and weaponry, and it has set a deadline for the NIA to submit its report by May 10.
The Madras High Court allowed BJP President J P Nadda’s rally in Tamil Nadu, stating that mere traffic disruptions not sufficient grounds for denial. The political rallies aimed to campaign for the upcoming Lok Sabha Election. The court instructed approval of an alternative route with police protection, ultimately granting the petition.