New Delhi: Veteran Congress leader Sonia Gandhi told a Delhi court on Saturday that the allegation questioning her inclusion in the electoral roll was politically motivated and lacked documentary evidence to show any manipulation or fraud on her part.
Gandhi, through advocates Tarannum Cheema and Kanishk Singh, filed a six-page response before special judge Vishal Gagan of Rouse Avenue court. (AFP)Gandhi, through advocates Tarannum Cheema and Kanishk Singh, filed a six-page response to special judge Vishal Gagan of Rouse Avenue court, who is presiding over a review petition filed by one Vikas Tripathi, challenging an order passed on September 11 last year, in which a magistrate dismissed his complaint that there was lack of due process against Gandhi.
While dismissing the plea, which sought a direction for an inquiry, the magistrate pointed to the lack of any solid evidence against the Congress leader to prove that she had forged documents to enroll herself as a voter.
The court added that the matter fell outside its jurisdiction as it involved matters relating to the central government and the Election Commission of India (ECI).
Represented by senior advocate Pawan Narang and advocate Himanshu Shetty, Tripathi filed a complaint claiming that while Sonia Gandhi took Indian citizenship on April 30, 1983, her name was enrolled as a voter three years earlier, in 1980.
More Read
The complaint alleged that Gandhi’s name was deleted in 1982 and re-entered on January 1, 1983.
Advocate Narang contended that if the Congress leader had validly applied for Indian citizenship as per the law of the land, his name should not have been removed from the electoral roll in 1982.
The complainant accused Gandhi of forging his citizenship documents, a cognizable offense under the Indian Code of Justice and the Representation of the People Act, 1950.
More Read
During Saturday’s hearing, the court posted the matter for February 21, when oral arguments on the plea will continue.
In his reply, Gandhi said the revision petition was “totally misconceived” and “politically motivated”, filed by the complainant “for abuse of process of law”.
He said that the magistrate court rightly observed that citizenship matters fall exclusively under the domain of the central government, while voter list disputes are the sole prerogative of the ECI.
“Criminal courts cannot entertain these functions by entertaining individual complaints under IPC/BNSS sections. This is prohibited by the doctrine of separation of powers and would violate Article 329 of the Constitution, which prohibits judicial interference in the electoral process,” the reply said.
Gandhi said it was clear from the complaint that a controversy raised in the media more than 25 years ago was being recycled for the purpose of appealing the current revision.
Referring to the complaint, the reply said, “…it is claimed that the respondent’s (Sonia Gandhi) petition of 1980 resulted in her name being included in the voter list. However, the date, other details, or the content of the petition are not mentioned.”
More Read
Gandhi noted that the complainant had claimed that in 1982 an outcry from the general public led to his name being removed from the electoral roll. “It is curious how, 43 years after the so-called outcry by the general public/media, how the complainant records a fact in a criminal complaint based on his direct knowledge,” his response said.
His lawyer also said that the complainant’s claim that Gandhi had re-entered his name in the voter list with the eligibility date of January 1, 1983, is preposterous and without any factual basis, as no document has been produced to show any allegation of forgery or fraud.
They said the complainant relied on an “investigative report” in a national daily on the date Gandhi applied for Indian citizenship and was given it without verifying the authenticity of the report.
Gandhi pointed out that it is the statutory function of the Election Commission to prepare the electoral roll in accordance with the Registration of Voters Rules, 1960, in line with Article 324 of the Constitution of India.
“The Election Commission has to prepare a proper voter list and keep it updated as per law. It is misleading to suggest or assume that a person’s name has been included in the list because he applied for such inclusion by submitting Form 6 under the Voters Registration Rules,” the reply said.
