Mayoral poll: Supreme Court agrees to examine AAP petition for urgent hearing

Satya Prakash

New Delhi, February 2

Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) councillor Kuldeep Kumar on Friday urged the Supreme Court to urgently take up his petition challenging a Punjab and Haryana High Court order over the Chandigarh mayoral election results that declared BJP candidate Manoj Sonkar the winner.

Senior counsel AM Singhvi mentioned Kumar’s petition for urgent hearing before a Bench led by CJI DY Chandrachud, which asked him to send an email as required under the procedure and assured that he would look into it.

“Send an email…I will look at it at 1 pm,” the CJI told Singhvi who alleged that the presiding officer was caught on video smudging the ballots.

In his capacity as the master of roster, the CJI examines important cases on the administrative sides during lunch to decide if any of them needed urgent hearing.

Now, the AAP candidate’s petition was expected to be taken up on Monday.

The political fight between AAP and the BJP over the Chandigarh mayoral polls reached the Supreme Court on Thursday with Kumar challenging the High Court’s order over the election.

BJP candidate Manoj Sonkar had bagged 16 votes against the 12 votes received by the Congress-AAP candidate Kuldeep Kumar after eight votes were rejected.

A Division Bench of Justice Sudhir Singh and Justice Harsh Bunger of the Punjab and Haryana High Court had on Wednesday gave no relief to AAP, which had demanded fresh polls under the supervision of a retired High Court Judge, alleging tampering with ballot papers.

The High Court had, however, issued a notice to the Chandigarh Administration and asked it to respond to Kumar’s petition in three weeks.

Kumar alleged that in complete departure from the practice and rules, the presiding officer refused to allow nominees of parties to monitor the counting of votes. He urged the top court to set aside the election result, alleging it was “a result of complete fraud and forgery laid upon the democratic process”.

“This is not a case of election dispute, but a case of abuse of public office, which destroys the very essence of faith reposed in the officer and is a constitutional wrong and breach of the doctrine of public trust. The case was so egregious that the High Court ought to have passed interim orders,” Kumar submitted.

Counsel asked to send email

“Send an email…I will look at it at 1 pm,” the CJI DY Chandrachud told senior counsel AM Singhvi who alleged that the presiding officer was caught on video smudging the ballots.