The Supreme Court of India.
Credit: PTI File Photo
Mumbai: The contentious issue of alleged irregularities and 76 lakh bogus votes polled in the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly elections will now be fought in the Supreme Court.
Days after the Bombay High Court has rejected a writ petition Mumbai resident Chetan Ahire, his lawyer Prakash Ambedkar, who is the founder President of Vanchit Bahujan Aghadi, announced the decision to move the apex court on the same grounds.
Ahire had challenged the legitimacy of approximately 76 lakh votes allegedly cast after the official poll-closing time of 6 pm on November 20, 2024, the day of polling.
He had contended that the returning officers neglected Election Commission of India (ECI) guidelines by not reporting these apparent mismatches.
“We have decided to approach the Supreme Court of India in the coming weeks. Vanchit Bahujan Aghadi will put the same facts which were put before the Bombay High Court,” Ambedkar told reporters in Mumbai, on Thursday.
“The court has not examined the issues that we have raised,” he said, adding that only the issue would be taken to the Supreme Court but also public domain.
The development comes at a time when Leader of the Opposition in Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi and top Congress brass including its President and Leader of the Opposition in the Rajya Sabha Mallikarjun Kharge has been flagging the issue which was heavily contested by BJP leadership including Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis.
The Central Election Commission and Chief Electoral Office (CEO) of Maharashtra had issued rebuttals from time to time.
The Bombay High Court’s order was available on Wednesday evening.
“….we have no manner of doubt that this writ petition needs to be summarily rejected. It is accordingly rejected. The hearing of this petition has practically taken the whole day leaving aside our urgent cause list, and for such reason the petition would certainly warrant dismissal with cost, however, we refrain from doing so,” the division bench of Bombay High Court comprising Justice Arif Doctor and Justice G S Kulkarni said in his order.
Senior Advocate Ashutosh Kumbhakoni represented the Election Commission while Advocate Uday Warunjikar, represented the Union of India.
The Bombay HC has also commented on the petitioner, saying: “ While parting we may also observe that the approach of the petitioner in filing the present petition, as rightly urged on behalf of the respondents is extremely casual, as seen not only from the contention as urged in the petition in invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226, sans any tangible material whatsoever, but also seen from the frame of the petition by impleading the Election Commission of India with the nomenclature as “Chief Election Commission of India”, and impleading State Election Commission by describing such respondent as “Chief Electoral Officer, the State Election Commission”. There are no such entities for a writ to be issued.”
On the observations of the court that time was wasted, Ambedkar said: “We have presented the facts…in fact, the court found it frivolous, whey was fine not imposed on us.”