Petition Details: Kirtikar's petition, filed through advocate Amit A. Karande, argues that the election results were materially affected by improper vote reception and significant breaches of statutory rules during the counting process. Specifically, the petition points to 333 uncounted tendered votes that could have influenced the outcome of the election.
Allegations of Procedural Irregularities: The petition lists several procedural irregularities during the vote counting process, which Kirtikar alleges compromised the integrity of the election:
- Exclusion of Counting Agents: Counting agents appointed by Kirtikar were allegedly not permitted to sit at the Returning Officer (RO) tables, despite having a statutory right to do so.
- Non-Issuance of Form 17-C: In 839 polling booths, Form 17-C (Part II), which records the results of counting, was not provided.
- Rejection of Recount Application: Kirtikar’s application for a recount of votes was reportedly rejected without due consideration.
- Unauthorized Mobile Phone Use: There were instances of unauthorized mobile phone use in the counting area, raising concerns about the potential for tampering or undue influence.
- Impersonation of Electors: Allegations of elector impersonation further undermine the credibility of the vote count.
- Discrepancies in Tendered Votes: Notable discrepancies were observed in the number of tendered votes recorded, suggesting possible errors or malfeasance.
Legal Arguments: Kirtikar’s legal team argues that these irregularities and statutory breaches necessitate the annulment of Waikar’s election. They contend that the improper reception of votes and procedural lapses significantly impacted the election results, thereby invalidating Waikar's victory.
Relief Sought: The petition seeks a court order to set aside Waikar’s election and declare Kirtikar as the winning candidate. This move is based on the premise that had the statutory rules been correctly followed, the election outcome might have been different.
Legal and Political Implications: This legal challenge is not just a battle over an election result but also reflects the ongoing political tussle between the two factions of Shiv Sena. The outcome of this case could have significant implications for the political dynamics in Maharashtra, particularly within the Shiv Sena party, which has been split into factions led by Uddhav Thackeray and Eknath Shinde.
Court Proceedings: The Bombay High Court will now scrutinize the allegations and the evidence presented by Kirtikar’s legal team. The court's decision will hinge on whether it finds substantial merit in the claims of procedural violations and statutory breaches during the election process.
Conclusion: Kirtikar’s challenge to Waikar’s election victory underscores the critical role of fair and transparent electoral processes in upholding democratic principles. As the Bombay High Court deliberates on this case, it will have to carefully consider the evidence of irregularities and the potential impact on the election result. The case is a stark reminder of the importance of adhering to electoral laws and procedures to maintain public trust in the democratic system.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.