Supreme Court Steps In Amidst Chandigarh Mayoral Election Controversy

In a recent mayoral election in Chandigarh, the Supreme Court expressed significant concerns over suspected irregularities that resulted in the BJP’s unexpected 16-12 victory. This was especially notable following the disqualification of eight votes associated with the AAP-Congress coalition.. The court directed its criticism toward the returning officer, accusing him of defacing ballot papers before rejection and thus, according to the court, “murdering democracy.”
The election dynamics appeared initially favorable for the AAP-Congress coalition, boasting a combined strength of 20 out of the 36-member electoral college, which included 35 elected members and the Lok Sabha representative from Chandigarh. However, after the disqualification of eight votes, the BJP emerged victorious.
In response to a petition from AAP candidate Kuldeep Kumar and a thorough examination of polling videos, the bench led by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud opted to indefinitely defer the planned inaugural session of the Chandigarh Municipal Corporation on February 7. The case is set for additional consideration on February 19.
Expressing deep dissatisfaction with the conduct of the returning officer, Anil Masih, the bench, comprising CJI Chandrachud and Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, pledged to safeguard the “purity of electoral processes” at any cost. The court threatened to appoint another returning officer if necessary.

Also Read:HPCL and Ultraviolette Automotive Forge Alliance to Propel EV Charging Network Expansion

The court directed the registrar general of Punjab & Haryana HC to take immediate control and secure the ballot papers, videography of polling, and other related materials. Chief Justice Chandrachud emphasized the importance of presenting the entire videography of the polling before the court.
The court strongly condemned the actions of the returning officer, stating, “This is a mockery of democracy. He (RO) is murdering democracy. Is this the way he conducts an election? We are simply appalled by what has happened.”
The Chief Justice further highlighted the officer’s behavior, mentioning, “Is this the behavior of an RO? He looks at the camera, defaces the ballot. Where there is a cross at the bottom, he keeps it in the tray. The moment he sees a cross at the top, the man defaces the ballot and looks at the camera to find who is looking at it. Please tell your returning officer that SC is watching over him.”

Also Read: AAP’s Solo Run in Haryana Elections Creates Opposition Uncertainty

Senior advocate Maninder Singh, representing Manoj Sonkar, the elected candidate, attempted to justify the process on January 30, stating it was a statutory requirement for the person to sign ballot papers after casting a vote. However, the court clarified that the discussion was not about regulations but about satisfying its conscience. If not, the court insisted on holding a fresh election, specifying that it would direct the appointment of the returning officer for the new election.
Solicitor general Tushar Mehta, representing the RO and Chandigarh administration, argued that the eight votes were invalidated because the voters ran away after casting their votes, requiring marshals to bring them back. The court, however, was not appeased, with Chief Justice Chandrachud stating, “This man (RO) needs to be prosecuted. Why is he looking at the camera? Is he an officer or a fugitive? He looks at the camera and quietly defaces the ballot papers.”
Senior advocate A M Singhvi proposed that the impasse could be resolved by conducting fresh elections. The bench issued notices to the respondents, including the Chandigarh administration and Sonkar, and emphasized the need for an appropriate interim order to protect the purity and sanctity of the electoral process, which, according to the court, the High Court failed to pass.