“Murder of Democracy”: Supreme Court on Chandigarh Mayor Elections Row

New Delhi: In a significant development in the Chandigarh mayoral polls, the Supreme Court denounced the Returning Officer’s actions, labelling it a “murder of democracy.” The Chief Justice, DY Chandrachud, heading the bench, expressed strong disapproval, stating that the defacement of ballot papers was a mockery of democracy, and insisted on the prosecution of the responsible official.

The Supreme Court directed that all records related to the mayoral election be securely held by the Registrar General of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Responding to a petition from AAP councillor Kuldeep Kumar challenging the results and seeking a fresh election, the court ordered the preservation of ballots and videography.

The Chandigarh Deputy Commissioner was instructed to submit relevant records to the High Court Registrar General by 5 pm on the same day. Additionally, the Bench issued a stay on the upcoming meeting of the Chandigarh Municipal Corporation scheduled for February 7.

Upon reviewing a video of the incident, the Chief Justice expressed dismay at the Presiding Officer’s conduct, questioning why the officer appeared to be fleeing from the camera. The controversy arose when BJP candidate Manoj Sonkar secured 16 votes against the Congress-AAP candidate Kuldeep Kumar’s 12 votes, with eight votes rejected.

The legal battle between AAP and BJP over the Chandigarh mayoral polls had escalated to the Supreme Court, with Kumar challenging the high court’s decision not to stay the election results. The Punjab and Haryana High Court, in a previous ruling, denied relief to AAP and issued a notice to the Chandigarh Administration to respond to Kumar’s petition within three weeks.

Kumar alleged a departure from established practices and rules, claiming that the presiding officer had denied party nominees the opportunity to monitor the vote counting. Seeking the annulment of the election result, Kumar asserted that it was marred by fraud and forgery, constituting a breach of public trust and a constitutional wrong.