Poll Pot : Gujarat Law Minister In Legal Soup
The wheels of justice turn
slowly, but grind exceedingly fine.
This is what is hoped in the case of
Gujarat minister Bhupendrasinh Chudasama, whose election victory in 2017 by a
mere 327 votes was challenged in the Gujarat High Court by his Congress rival
Ashwin Rathod. As the case winds down, all eyes are on the judgment that will
come out.
Chudasama is a heavyweight in the Gujarat
cabinet as he holds the ministries of law and justice, education and
legislative and parliamentary affairs. He has enjoyed the confidence of various
chief ministers, be it Keshubhai Patel, Narendra Modi, Anandiben Patel or Vijay
Rupani. He is a six-time legislator who has been with the saffron outfit since
the Jan Sangh days, was an agriculture minister in the Janata dal-BJP coalition
government (1990), chairman of the Sardar Sarovar Narmada Nigam and
vice-chairman of the State Planning Commission.
The current travails of Chudasama began
when the election result came out in December 2017 and he scraped through from
Dholka constituency defeating Rathod by 327 votes. After his narrow
defeat, Rathod petitioned the Gujarat
High Court that Chudasama won the polls by using unfair means and
therefore, his election be declared void. The bone of contention was 429 postal
votes which the returning officer rejected, a number higher than the margin of
victory.
Rathod’s petition said that the then deputy
collector of Dholka, Gaurang Prajapati, who was to be the returning officer
(RO), was removed after the model code of conduct came into force. He was
replaced by Dhaval Jani with the motive of enhancing the prospects of
Chudasama. It was also pointed out that the Election Commission mandates that
postal ballots be counted before counting on the Electronic Voting
Machines (EVMs). However in this case, the postal ballots were counted after
the EVM votes and therefore, in full knowledge of the fact that there was only
a slender margin between the two contenders.
As evident from the record, there seems to
have been an element of desperation in Chudasama trying to stall the
proceedings in the case. He had challenged the maintainability of the petition
in the High Court but it was rejected. He then moved the Supreme Court but in
vain. He came back to the Supreme Court but seeing that the Court seemed in a
mood to reject his affidavit, he hastily withdrew it. In the affidavit,
Chudasama had hinted that the High Court was not conducting a fair trial and
had made allegations in support of his plea for rejection of the election
petition against him.
Subsequently, an anguished Justice Paresh
Upadhyaya who was hearing the case in the Gujarat High Court, expressed his
displeasure and sought a response from his lawyer, Nirupam Nanavaty. “No less
than the law minister of the state, on oath, contends before the Supreme Court
against the High Court. Shut down the High Court, if such be the case,” he
said. But the judge made it clear that he would not recuse himself from the
case and was not scared of even impeachment.
Meanwhile, as the case progresses, discrepancies
and violations of EC guidelines are coming up before the Court. The
counsel for Rathod who first questioned Dhaval Jani as an “independent
witness”, later urged the Court to permit him to be cross-examined as a “hostile
or adverse witness” as he had given contradictory evidence on oath. During his
cross-examination, Jani admitted that he did not fully comply with the rules
laid down by the EC. He also admitted that he had not provided footage of the
counting hall sought by Rathod through an RTI, saying it was not in his
possession. However, it was later furnished to the Court. He also failed to
substantiate his statement about possession of DVD footage of the counting
hall.
Meanwhile, in an important ruling on April 2,
the Gujarat High Court made the EC a respondent in the poll trial proceedings.
The Court observed that vote counting rules were violated on seven counts and
ruled that both the EC and the returning officer be enjoined as respondents as
the facts that had come up before it needed to be explained by them. EC
observer Vinita Bohra, who issued the certificate of fair and accurate
completion of the election process, will now have some explaining to do, more
so in the light of the fact that mandatory instructions of the EC were violated
by the RO’s own admission.
“It would also be just and proper to put
the facts noted in this order to the notice of the Election Commission. It is
noted that what is recorded above is neither the opinion of the court nor
has it arrived at any judgment on any issue. However the facts noted above are
so glaring that this court has thought it prudent to put it to the notice of
the ECI so that it can look into it and take appropriate corrective measures,
if it so desires,” the order said.
The Election Commission, on its part has
recommended disciplinary proceedings against returning officer Dhaval Jani and
Rajasthan- cadre IAS officer Vinita Bohra for not complying with the norms of
counting of vote as observer for the Dholka constituency during the 2017
elections. Bohra has sought time from the High Court to file a reply.
There are political implications attached to
the final verdict. For one, Chudasama is the law minister responsible for
formulation of various laws by the government. In the course of this case, he
also levelled allegations against a member of the judiciary before the apex
court. Any adverse ruling will reflect poorly not only on the law minister for
violating the sanctity of the position he holds, but also on the state
government and the party in power which claims a high moral ground on its professed
crusade against corruption.
Conversely, it would increase the stature of
small-time Congress worker Rathod who gave a tough fight to Chudasama, a BJP
stalwart. If it is proved that the victory was fraudulently acquired, it may
spell the end of the political career of the law minister, besides providing a
strong stick to the Congress in the state.
BJP insiders say that looking at the damage
this case could do, Chudasama was offered a state party presidentship, but he
chose ministership instead.
You guys are writing some Amazing tips. This article really helped me a lot. Thanks for sharing this.I also used these. For more details: https://www.alphaenviro.net/
ReplyDeleteWhy are everyone looking for ways online to get help solving their pregnancy and infertility problems when most of every native American is talking online about the help of Dr Mandaker Alamun. I checked him out when my husband who could not get me pregnant for over 9 years of marriage as a result of low sperm count became fertile and now, I am 5 months pregnant and it is this man known as Dr Mandaker who helped my husband solve his problem. My name is Alecia Maldonado from CA USA. I would advise anyone and everyone who needs the help of any spell caster in love marriage,finance, job promotion,lottery spell,poker spell,golf spell,Law & Court case Spells,money spell,weigh loss spell,diabetic spell,hypertensive spell,high cholesterol spell,Trouble in marriage,Barrenness(need spiritual marriage separation),good Luck, Money Spells,it's all he does or looking for breakthrough in your political career to meet this Dr Mandaker the link to his website copy this link (witch-doctor.page4.me)His email contact witchhealing@outlook.com for He is a Reliable and trustworthy. I and my husband have gone to different hospitals having the thinking that I was at fault for not getting pregnant. But at the Federal hospital, they examined him too and his sperm count was low and unable to get a woman pregnant as a result of male infertility. It was then I sort out,thanks to Dr Mandaker.
ReplyDelete