SC stays Gujarat HC order nullifying election of Minister Chudasama

The Supreme Court on Friday stayed the Gujarat High Court's order nullifying the 2017 election of senior Minister Bhupendrasinh Manubha Chudasama as an MLA for alleged corrupt practices.

The High Court had noted that 429 postal ballots were rejected while the victory margin was just 327 votes.

A bench of Justices Mohan M Shantanagoudar and R Subhash Reddy issued notice to rival Congress candidate Ashwin Kamsubhai Rathod on whose plea the High Court had passed its order.

The court suspended the operation of the High Court's May 12 order by rejecting objections made by senior advocate Kapil Sibal for Rathod against the stay.

Sibal said the Election Commission's instructions for recounting the votes, if postal ballots were to be rejected, were not complied with.

Senior advocates Harish Salve and Neeraj Kishan Kaul, for Chudasama, contended that one of the fundamental principles is to find out as to which way the votes were going.

The election petition nowadays is considered to be a very rigorous process, they said.

In his special leave petition, Chudasama contended that High Court's order was "patently bad, illegal, contrary to law and in gross violation of the fundamental rights".

He claimed that his rival Congress candidate Rathod had not led positive, reliable and cogent evidence to prove any of the issues and therefore, he was not entitled to be declared as duly elected candidate from Dholka Constituency for the Gujarat State Assembly Elections, held on December 14, 2017.

The petitioner here, as a BJP candidate, got elected with the margin of 327 votes.

The High Court had found that corrupt practice was committed under Section 123 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 during the election as 429 postal ballot papers were illegally rejected at the time of counting of votes.

He sought immediate stay and setting aside of the High Court's judgement of May 12.

Seventy-year-old Chudasama, at present, is a Member of the Council of Ministers of the Gujarat government, holding the portfolios of the Departments of Education and Law and Justice.

According to him,the total votes received by the Returning Officer through postal ballot papers were 1356. Out of 1356, the Returning Officer had rejected 429 postal ballots.

In his plea, he claimed that the Congress candidate had not discharged his onus of wrongful rejection of votes. He also contended that the High Court failed to appreciate that there was no objection by the Congress candidate or his agents on rejection of postal ballots till the very end of the counting process.