HC reserves order on plea of MP minister to vote in prez poll

The Delhi High Court on Thursday reserved its verdict on a plea of disqualified Madhya Pradesh minister Narottam Mishra to vote in the presidential polls on July 17.

"Judgement reserved," a specially constituted single- judge bench of Justice Indermeet Kaur said after hearing day-long arguments on behalf of Mishra, the Election Commission of India and Congress leader Rajendra Bharti on whose complaint the poll panel had disqualified the BJP leader. The Supreme Court had yesterday transferred the matter to the high court to be decided expeditiously before the July 17 presidential election.

Pursuant to the apex court's decision, the high court had yesterday constituted the special single-judge bench to hear Mishra's plea challenging the ECI's June 23 order disqualifying him for three years over paid news charges.

The poll panel's order had held him guilty of filing wrong accounts of poll expense relating to articles and advertorials in the media during the 2008 assembly polls.

During the day's arguments, senior advocate Dhruv Mehta, who appeared for Mishra, assailed the ECI decision on the grounds of delay in proceedings and that no evidence was led to show that he had authorised the paid news articles.

However, he admitted that some of the articles published by certain media houses were "appeals to the voters to vote for him".

This admission was made after the court perused some of the articles and said "some of these appear to be appeals to voters to vote for him. What is your take on this?"

Mehta also claimed that the disqualification order would not affect his (the minister's) current tenure, after he won the 2013 polls, as the ECI decision came on a complaint with regard to the elections of 2008.

However, Justice Indermeet Kaur said that what she understood from the apex court order was, that Mishra's plea has to be decided before July 17 as his ability to vote in the presidential polls rests on the outcome.

While transferring the matter to the high court, the apex court had said, "We are of the view, that (right to vote in the presidential election) can only be determined after the challenge raised to the order passed by the Election Commission of India on June 23, 2017, is suitably addressed by the High Court, finally or by an interim order as the High Court may consider appropriate."

If the disqualification is upheld, he would not be able to vote and, therefore, even as per the apex court order the ECI decision does impact the politician's current tenure, the high court special bench said.

Mishra's lawyer disagreed with this observation of the special bench.

Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Bharti, said the delay by ECI in even issuing a show cause notice was because there was a stay by the MP High Court on the proceedings in the poll panel for two years.

He also argued that while such matters need to be decided expeditiously, there was no limitation on the time taken and therefore, the BJP leader cannot claim delay as a ground for challenging the disqualification.

Mishra's lawyer had argued that while Bharti had accused him of incurring expenses exceeding the limit imposed during polls, the ECI had said there was "implied authorisation" a point that the complainant had never raised.