Delhi High Court: The present petition was filed seeking a direction to Respondent 2, Central Election Commission of India to take strict action against Respondent 3, Rahul Gandhi for making an allegedly false and vilifying speech at Bayatu, District Barmer, Rajasthan on 22-11-2023 and to register complaints against him under various provisions of the Penal Code, 1860 and the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The Division Bench of Manmohan, ACJ., and Mini Pushkarna, J., disposed of the present writ petition by directing the Election Commission of India to decide the matter in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within eight weeks.
Counsel for the Central Election Commission of India submitted that notice dated 23-11-2023 was already issued to Rahul Gandhi. The Court noted that in the said notice, it was stated that if a reply was not received by 6pm on 25-11-2023, the Central Election Commission of India shall take action as it deemed fit. The Court further noted that till date, the Election Commission of India had received no reply and the deadline for filing the reply was also over.
The Court opined that though the statements in the impugned speech, if true, were not in good taste, yet the Election Commission of India was examining the matter, and thus, the Court disposed of the present writ petition by directing the Election Commission of India to decide the matter in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within eight weeks.
[Bharat Nagar v. Union of India, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 8191, Order dated 21-12-2023]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For the Petitioner: Adish Aggarwal, Kirti Uppal, Senior Advocates; Shobhit Jain, Sudhir, R.S., Siddharth, Abhinav Singh, Sandeep, Bhavi Garg, Advocates
For the Respondents: Chetan Sharma, ASG; Apoorv Kurup, CGSC; Suruchi Suri, Standing Counsel; Amit Gupta, Saurabh Tripathi, Akhil, Aparna, Kirti, Gauri Goburdhan, Aanchal, Vikramaditya, Ananya Mittal, Advocates
Buy Penal Code, 1860 HERE
