PIL In Delhi HC Seeks EC Probe On Rajeev Chandrasekhar MP's Election Affidavit

Team SoOLEGAL 23 May 2019 5:00pm

PIL In Delhi HC Seeks EC Probe On Rajeev Chandrasekhar MP's Election Affidavit

A PIL has been filed in the Delhi High Court to investigate into the affidavit enclosed by the Rajya Sabha Member of Parliament, Rajeev Chandrasekhar, member of parliament and a businessman. The PIL contended that Mr. Rajeev Chandrasekhar has not disclosed the full information in election affidavit enclosing his assets, while contesting the Rajya Sabha elections in March 2018. The PIL is filed by Mr. Renjith Thomas, who is a software professional from Bangalore by an advocate counsel Avani Bansal.

The PIL contended that Mr. Chandrasekhar owns a LAND ROVER, in his own name, as per the Ministry of Road Transport & Highways and had not disclosed this information under his affidavit. It was further contended that Mr. Chandrasekhar also has not disclosed his wife's shareholding in one of the company namely Vectra Consultancy Services Private Limited, in which the total number of shares are 6,34,360 out of which 6,34,160 are with Mr. Chandrasekhar, 100 shares are with his wife - Anju Chandrasekhar and 100 shares are with one Mrs. Valli Chandrasekhar.

Further it was contended that he did not disclosed the two other residential properties that he owns in the posh neighborhood of Koramangala 3rd Block, in Bangalore. The PIL seeks a direction from the Election Commission of India to exercise its Constitutional powers under Art. 324 of the Constitution and investigate into the such alleged matter. Section 125A of Representation of Peoples Act 1951, provides 6 months imprisonment or fine or both in case of filing of a false affidavit.

Election Commission of India has passed a circular No.4/2014/sdr-vol-I dated 26th April 2014 which states the 'aggrieved person' to approach the local criminal court, from where the candidate filed the nomination papers if they find any irregularity in the affidavit. The PIL stated that this circular can't be used by the Election Commission of India to diminish its constitutional obligation under Art. 324 where, it has 'superintendence, direction and control' of all election related process. Since most of the people would be hesitant to approach the local criminal court and follow the matter against such sitting MPs, this circular is used by the Election Commission by not investigating into the matter itself, petitioner alleged. PIL seeks an interpretation of this circular to ensure that ECI does not do away with its duty towards all voters in India who have a fundamental right to know about the correct antecedents of their candidates under Art. 19 (1) (a) of the Indian Constitution. It also vouch ECI to investigate into the affidavit filed by Rajeev Chandrasekhar.

Tagged: delhihighcourt   rajeevchandrasekhar  
Did you find this write up useful? YES 1 NO 0
New Members view all


C2RMTo Know More

Something Awesome Is In The Work









Sign-up and we will notify you of our launch.
We’ll also give some discount for your effort :)

* We won’t use your email for spam, just to notify you of our launch.

SAARTHTo Know More

Launching Soon : SAARTH, your complete client, case, practise & document management SAAS application with direct client chat feature.

If you want to know more give us a Call at :+91 98109 29455 or Mail