look news india
The bench said that the presiding officer acted against the rules during the counting of votes. The presiding officer is supposed to be impartial, but he deliberately spoiled the ballot papers. He also made false statements in the court. His behavior is wrong for 2 reasons. First, it improperly influenced the election. Second, he lied to the court. The Supreme Court has issued a contempt notice to Anil Masih, the returning officer of Chandigarh Mayor elections.
Saurabh Bhardwaj said- 'What will they do where there are no cameras?'
Aam Aadmi Party leader and Delhi government minister Saurabh Bhardwaj said that the battle was fought in the Supreme Court. A huge victory has been achieved. Along with happiness, there is also concern as to what is the condition of the country today. What did it mean when India became independent? The British also built things like roads, trains and ports, but the country was made independent so that the people could choose their own government. And the elected government should work for the people. Today, it is a matter of concern that the central government of the country and the world's largest political party BJP were seen lying, cheating and committing fraud on camera in a small election in Chandigarh, so understand what these people would do in such a place? no camera..
Arvind Kejriwal will hold a press conference
AAP convenor Arvind Kejriwal will hold a press conference on Tuesday evening at 5.30 pm on the Supreme Court's decision on Chandigarh Mayor elections.
Aam Aadmi Party posted and wrote – Satyamev Jayate
Aam Aadmi Party, while posting on Supreme Court's decision on X, wrote that Satyamev Jayate.
Chandigarh Mayor Kuldeep Kumar What else did the Supreme Court say in the order?
The bench said that a notice is being issued to the presiding officer (Anil Masih) for lying in the court. They will have to reply within 3 weeks. All the records are being returned to the High Court Registrar. It should be protected. The Supreme Court has canceled the results of Chandigarh Mayor election declared on January 30. Kuldeep Kumar, the joint candidate of Aam Aadmi Party and Congress, was declared the winner. The court said that 8 votes received by Kuldeep Kumar were wrongly declared invalid. Anil Masih, who was the presiding officer, was issued a show cause notice for his conduct.
Supreme Court has declared Aam Aadmi Party's Kuldeep Kumar as the Mayor of Chandigarh.
The Supreme Court has validated 8 ballot papers tampered by Returning Officer Anil Masih and declared Kuldeep Kumar, the joint candidate of Aam Aadmi Party and Congress, the winner for the post of Mayor of Chandigarh.
Chief Justice made very strict remarks
Hearing has started in the Supreme Court regarding alleged irregularities in Chandigarh Mayor elections. Meanwhile, the Chief Justice has made a very strict comment and said that the 8 votes which had become invalid during the counting, will now be valid. Along with this, votes will be counted again.
What did the Supreme Court say about Anil Masih's ballot paper being spoiled?
The Supreme Court bench said the grievance of the petitioner, urged by senior counsel Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Gurminder Singh, is that the video footage leaves no doubt that the presiding officer did not use ink while signing the ballot paper. on the lower half of the accused ballot papers and this was in the case of 8 ballot papers which were cast in favor of the petitioner. Consequently, it was submitted that there was a deliberate attempt by the Presiding Officer to falsify the 8 votes cast in favor of the petitioner so that the 8th respondent could be declared the elected candidate on the basis of securing 16 votes.
Supreme Court said- 'Democratic process was violated'
The bench said that a petition was filed in the High Court. On which the High Court ordered to conduct fair elections and videography of the entire process. Elections could not be held on January 18. This happened due to the ill health of the presiding officer. After this a petition was again filed in the High Court. The elections were postponed till 6 February. Which was also challenged in the High Court. On January 23, the High Court had said that postponing the elections for 18 days was wrong. The High Court had ordered to hold elections on January 30. The notification for mayor election was issued on January 10. Councilor Anil Masih was appointed the presiding officer. Elections were to be held for mayor and other posts. The alliance of AAP and Congress has fielded Kuldeep Kumar. The second candidate was Manoj Kumar. A total of 35 councilors and MPs of Chandigarh can vote in this election, which means a total of 36 votes were cast. Presiding Officer Masih declared the result on 30 January. 8 votes were declared invalid. Out of the remaining 28, the petitioner (Kuldeep Kumar) got 12 votes, the respondent (Manoj Kumar) got 16 votes. On February 5, the Supreme Court heard the case and passed some orders. The case was heard again in the Supreme Court on 19 February. We brought all the records with us. According to the rules, the presiding officer has to sign the ballot paper. If there is any defect in a ballot paper, it can be declared invalid. If a councilor votes for more than one candidate, makes marks on the ballot paper, makes marks while voting so that it is not known who voted for whom – all these are grounds for declaring the vote invalid. It is seen in the video that the presiding officer has marked 8 ballot papers. The petitioner got all these votes. Due to which these votes became illegal and the petitioner lost the election. The democratic process was violated.
What did the Supreme Court say on the mayor election?
The bench said that the agenda of the meeting was to conduct elections for Mayor, Senior Deputy Mayor and Deputy Mayor. The current matter is related to the mayor election. A writ petition under Section 226 was filed on behalf of the petitioner in the Punjab and Haryana High Court, seeking direction to the Deputy Commissioner to ensure that the posts of Mayor, Senior Deputy Mayor, Deputy Mayor of the Corporation are kept vacant. Should be. Fair elections and appointments.
What did the Supreme Court say in the order?
The Supreme Court bench said that Deputy Commissioner of Union Territory Chandigarh, Vinay Pratap Singh IAS, acting as the prescribed authority, directed under Article 38 to convene a meeting of the councilors on January 18, 2024 at 11 am. Anil Masih was appointed president from among the councilors who did not stand in the election.
Supreme Court started issuing orders
The bench pronounced the order: Section 38 of the Punjab Municipal Corporation Act 1976 has been extended to the Union Territory of Chandigarh. It provides that the Corporation shall at its first meeting elect its Chairman, who shall be known as the Mayor of the Corporation. Section 60 (A) and Regulation 6 (1) of the Chandigarh Municipal Corporation (Procedure and Conduct) Regulations 1996 provide that the meeting for the election of the Mayor shall be convened by the Divisional Commissioner, who is the prescribed authority. Preside over the meeting. Nominate a councilor who is not a candidate for election.
Supreme Court gave strict instructions on Tuesday
In the matter of alleged irregularities in the Chandigarh Mayor elections, the Supreme Court on Tuesday issued strict instructions and directed for recounting. Not only this, the Chief Justice has also said that 8 votes have been declared invalid. Now these will be validated during counting.
The returning officer puts a cross on the ballot paper
In the hearing before the CJI bench on Monday, the Returning Officer admitted that it was he who had put the cross on the ballot paper. The court asked for all the original video recordings and election related documents that reached the court room after interrogating the returning officer. Videos and ballot papers of the returning officer were also deposited in the court room.
The decision of the returning officer was challenged in the Supreme Court.
A bench of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Mishra is hearing the case. Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) councilor Kuldeep Kumar has challenged in the Supreme Court the decision of the Presiding Officer i.e. Returning Officer to declare 8 votes invalid in the Mayor and Deputy Mayor elections.
democracy has been murdered
In the last hearing on the mayor election process, Chief Justice DY Chandrachud had reprimanded the administration and Returning Officer Anil Masih and said that this is a mockery of democracy. Watching the video of the actions of the Returning Officer in this election makes it clear that democracy has been murdered. What does the returning officer do? We do not want democracy to be killed in the country. We will not let this happen, the Supreme Court will not turn a blind eye to such a situation. The Supreme Court made this comment after watching the video of voting and counting of votes during the Mayor and Deputy Mayor elections.
Why were you looking at the camera?
The video clip shown in the court is from the time when votes were being disqualified. The Supreme Court also directed Returning Officer Anil Masih to be present in this election. After which the returning officer appeared in the Supreme Court. CJI asked who is the Returning Officer and how is he appointed? He asked the returning officer why were you looking at the camera?
Eight papers were marked
Returning Officer Anil Masih said- There was a lot of noise towards the camera, so I was looking there. The court asked whether you had marked X on some ballot papers or not. Christ said- Yes, I had written eight on the paper. But the mayor candidate of Aam Aadmi Party came and snatched the ballot paper, tore it and ran away. The court asked, but why were you crucified? Under which rule did you take this action?
Action should be taken against RO
Christ replied that he was trying to mark an illegible paper. The CJI again asked that it means you accept that you have put the marks there. Christ agreed. After which the court told SG Tushar Mehta that Masih has confessed that he had targeted. In such a situation, action should be taken against them. We will ask the Deputy Commissioner to appoint a new returning officer. We will ask the Registrar General of Punjab and Haryana High Court to monitor this.
