[ Amar Sangno ]
ITANAGAR, 18 Jul: In an unprecedented development, the Gauhati High Court on Monday unseated Tezu MLA Karikho Kri from the MLA seat by declaring the 2019 assembly election result “null and void.”
The Itanagar permanent bench of the HC pronounced the decision after perusing Election Petition No 01 (AP), 2019, filed by Congress candidate Nuney Tayang, challenging the declaration of the result of the 2019 assembly election for the Tezu assembly constituency.
With this judgment, the Tezu assembly constituency is now vacant.
This is the second judgment pronounced by the HC based on a petition. It had earlier disqualified Hayuliang MLA Dasanglu Pul on 25 April, 2023. However, Pul got interim relief from the Supreme Court by staying the high court judgment.
Tayang had filed the petition under Section 80, 80-A, and 81 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, seeking “a declaration that the election to the member of legislative assembly from Tezu assembly constituency be declared void under Section 90 (a) (c) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.”
The election had been held on 11 April, 2019, and the result had been declared on 27 May, 2019. Kri had been declared the winner as an independent candidate.
Pronouncing the judgment, Justice Nani Tagia ruled: “Consequently, having answered the issues framed for determination in the instant case in the manner indicated above, the election of Respondent No 1/returned candidate from Tezu assembly constituency in the election held pursuant to Notification No 464/ARUN-LA/2019, dated 18 March, 2019, issued by the secretary, Election Commission of India, Nirvachan Sadan, Ashoka Road, New Delhi, which notification was reproduced by the chief electoral officer, Arunachal Pradesh, Itanagar, and published in the Arunachal Pradesh Gazette Extraordinary No 120, Vol XXVI, Naharlagun, Monday, March 18, 2019, is hereby declared void under Section 100 (l) (b), 100 (l) (d) (i), and (iv) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.”
Justice Tagia further observed: “From a thorough consideration of the entire matter, the court is of the considered opinion that in the present case, respondent No 1 (Kri) had not presented his nomination paper in accordance with Section 33 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, and, as such, the nomination paper of Respondent No 1 is liable to be rejected under Section 36 (2) (b) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.”
“Returning officer, Tezu, having not rejected the nomination paper of Respondent No 1, the acceptance of the nomination paper was therefore improper, thereby materially affecting the election of Respondent No 1 as member of legislative assembly to Tezu assembly constituency.” Justice Tagia ruled.
“Though it is a well-settled proposition that the election of a candidate who has won an election should not be lightly interfered with, at the same time, it has also to be borne in mind that one of the essentials of election law is to safeguard the purity of the election process and to see that people do not get elected by flagrant breaches of the law,” Justice Tagia added.
The high court immediately sent a copy of the judgment order to the election commission and the speaker of the legislative assembly, in accordance with the provisions of Section 103 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
Tayang alleged that “Kri had made false declaration in his election nomination paper and did not disclose in Form 26 of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, that he was in occupation of a government accommodation, being MLA Cottage No 1 located in E Sector, Itanagar.”
The petitioner also claimed that “Kri did not submit ‘no dues certificates’ from the concerned department towards the rent, electricity charges, water charges and telephone charges for the aforesaid government accommodation.”
He further contended that “there was an inconsistency in the declaration made by Kri in the government dues as well as disputed government dues.”
Meanwhile, Tayang’s legal counsel wrote a letter to the speaker, seeking immediate consideration of the HC judgment.
It is learnt that the HC on Tuesday rejected an interlocutory application filed by Kri.
“I am not inclined to stay the judgment and order dated 17.07.2023, passed in the Election Petition No 1 of 2019, for a period of 1 (one) month, in the absence of sufficient cause shown by the applicant in the accompanying application, thereby, leaving the applicant to file an appeal before the Hon’ble Supreme Court” HC stated.
The Arunachal Times sent queries to Kri, but he did not respond.
