Jubilee Hills result challenged in HC over alleged disclosure lapses
Hyderabad: On Monday Maganti Sunitha Gopinath, wife of the late MLA Maganti Gopinath, filed an election petition in the High Court seeking a direction to declare the election of Congress legislator Naveen Yadav of Jubilee Hills constituency, as invalid, null and void.
The petition alleges that Yadav failed to provide information pertaining to seven criminal cases pending before various police stations against him in newspapers and through TV channels during the election campaign as mandated by law. The Chief Electoral Officer of Telangana, vide his memorandum dated October 14 had directed all the candidates contesting the by-poll to publish their antecedents in newspapers and TV channels.
The petitioner contends that this directive, which was issued in compliance with SC order, was not adhered to by the elected candidate.
Sunitha, who contested on a BRS ticket in the by-poll held on November 11, secured 74,259 votes while Yadav won with a majority, securing 98,988 votes.
The petitioner argues that if the election of Yadav is declared invalid, she, having secured the second highest number of votes should be declared elected. She relies on the SC judgment in Kisan Shankar Kathore Vs Arun Dattareya Sawanth reported in 2014 (14) SCC 162, which established that every citizen has a right to know the criminal antecedents of candidates contesting elections; such information should be made available by publishing in newspapers and TV channels.
The petitioner raised an additional ground alleging violation of the model code of conduct and electoral laws during the campaign. She contends that CM Revanth Reddy, the star campaigner, was seen publicly brandishing and waving a sword during a road show in Rahmatnagar while appealing to the electorate for votes in favour of Yadav.
The petition alleges that the CM delivered a provocative and communally inciting speech during the road show, stating that Muslims exist because of Congress; Muslims get respect because of the Congress, and that if the party is not there, there are no Muslims.
The petitioner submits that such a statement constitutes an impermissible appeal to religion and is in violation of the code and the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
Sunitha contends that Yadav has violated Section 123 (read with Section 125) of the Representation of the People Act and committed corrupt practices by not publishing the criminal antecedents relating to the FIRs and charges framed against him, as mandated by law.
The petitioner seeks a direction to the Election Commission to declare Yadav’s election invalid and to declare her elected.
The petition is at scrutiny stage and will be numbered shortly; it is likely to be heard by a single bench.
