Election Commission begins hearing of mining lease case against Soren, BJP seeks disqualification of Jharkhand CM


legal advisor for BJP before the demand on Tuesday disqualification of election commission Chief Minister of Jharkhand Hemant Soren As a legislator in a mining lease case, claiming that he violated a provision of election law by extending himself a favor in respect of a government contract while in office. Former Chief Minister of Jharkhand Raghubar Das The BJP has accused Soren of “abusing his position” to get “in-principle approval” for a stone quarrying lease in his name in Ranchi district despite having a mining department, a clear case of corruption and conflict of interest. Example is.

election Commission The Indian government had in May sent a notice to Soren seeking his comment on the issue.

It is alleged that the lease owner has violated Section 9A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, which deals with “disqualification for Government contracts, etc”.

Soren’s legal team, however, said that Section 9A of the Representation of the People Act is not applicable in this case. Supreme court ruling.

Initiating arguments before the Election Commission, which acts as a quasi-judicial body in such matters, the BJP – the petitioner – contended that Soren deserved to be disqualified as he had declared himself as a chief minister under his signature. lease was given.

Briefing reporters about BJP’s arguments, Kumar Harsh, one of its lawyers, said it was a case of disqualification and involved corruption.

Following a reference from the Jharkhand governor, the Election Commission in May had issued a notice to Soren under Section 9A of the Representation of the People Act, which deals with the disqualification of an MLA for government contracts.

“A person shall be disqualified, and unless, in the course of his trade or business, he has entered into a contract with the appropriate Government for the supply of goods or for the performance of any act done by him, That Government,” states the section.

According to Kumar Harsh, Soren’s side sought more time to conclude the arguments.

“Expressing displeasure, the commission asked him to start the debate. He barely argued for two minutes and sought time again,” he said.

However, his claim was rejected by one of Soren’s legal representatives, SK Mendiratta.

Mendiratta has served with the Election Commission for over 50 years.

“We didn’t ask for time. We said they took two hours, so we would also like to take two or two-and-a-half hours. They (EC) said we will hear your side on the next date,” Mendiratta told reporters.

He said that the respondent (Soren) is of the view that it is the judgment of the Supreme Court that Section 9A is not applicable in such cases. “The EC will have to decide… They said it is a matter of disqualification. But we said that 9A does not apply,” he said.

The poll panel will later inform the next date of hearing in the matter. Soren was earlier given two extensions by the Election Commission to start the hearing.



Source link

Related posts

Leave a Comment