A Delhi court on Monday revived a complaint against senior Congress leader Sonia Gandhi, alleging voter manipulation and forgery on her part in adding her name to the electoral list in 1980, and directed a magistrate to hear the matter afresh next week by calling for a police status report.
Special Judge Vishal Gogne of Rouse Avenue Court passed the order while setting aside a magistrate’s decision last year dismissing allegations against Gandhi, observing that the judge failed to substantiate the reasons for junking the petitioner’s allegations. “The order suffers from manifest error in law on account of non-compliance of 175(3) of BNSS and on account of not hearing the submissions of the investigating officer and not calling a status report”.
Also Read I Congress calls SIR ‘Shah Instigated Removal’, flags ‘unusually high’ voter deletions
Voter roll inclusion before becoming Indian citizen
The judge was presiding over a revision petition moved by lawyer Vikas Tripathi, vice-president of the Central Delhi Court Bar Association of the Rouse Avenue courts, challenging an order passed on September 11 last year, wherein a magistrate dismissed his complaint after holding that the accusations against Gandhi lacked substance and abused the process of law.
Tripathi had filed a complaint claiming that while Gandhi took Indian citizenship on April 30, 1983, her name was enrolled as a voter in the electoral list three years before this, in 1980.
{{/usCountry}}Tripathi had filed a complaint claiming that while Gandhi took Indian citizenship on April 30, 1983, her name was enrolled as a voter in the electoral list three years before this, in 1980.
{{/usCountry}}The complaint alleged that Gandhi’s name was deleted in 1982 and re-entered again on January 1, 1983.
Special Judge Gogne observed that the magistrate seems to have casually dismissed several factual allegations without delving into their veracity.
“The order suffers from non-application of mind and is liable to be set aside. The magistrate had not discussed the implications of the documents presented by the petitioner”.
Remanding the matter back to the magistrate, the court asked for a status report to be sought from the investigating officer on the allegations.
While junking the plea which sought directions for investigation, the magistrate had pointed to the lack of any cogent evidence against the Congress leader, proving she forged papers to enrol herself as a voter.
Sonia Gandhi alleges political motivations
Gandhi on her part, through senior advocate R.S. Cheema, informed the court that the complaint questioning her inclusion in the electoral roll was politically motivated and lacked documentary evidence to show any manipulation and forgery on her end.
She said that the revision plea was “wholly misconceived” and “politically motivated” and an attempt to “abuse the process of law”. She pointed out that the magistrate’s court had rightly observed that matters of citizenship fell exclusively under the central government’s domain, while electoral roll disputes were the sole prerogative of ECI.
Her reply said, “Criminal courts cannot usurp these functions by entertaining private complaints disguised under IPC/BNSS sections. This is barred by the doctrine of separation of powers and would violate Article 329 of the Constitution, which prohibits judicial interference in the electoral process”.
Also Read I 'Cordial, then rough': Inside the Penguin-Sonia Gandhi memoir fallout
Gandhi added that it was evident from the complaint that a controversy that was raised in the media more than 25 years back was being recycled.
Her counsel further said that the complainant’s assertion that Gandhi got her name re-entered in the electoral roll having a qualifying date of January 1, 1983, was incomprehensible and without any factual basis as no documents were produced to show any alleged forgery or falsification.
Gandhi pointed out that it was the statutory function of the election commission to prepare the electoral roll in accordance with the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, drawn in tune with article 324 of the Constitution of India.