The petitioners, Kamaljit Singh Duggal and Ayush Rana, residents of Kalkaji, allege that Atishi and her election agents engaged in corrupt practices during the recent assembly polls. They claim that a day before polling, associates of Atishi were apprehended with ₹5 lakh in cash, purportedly intended to bribe voters, which would constitute a violation of Section 123 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
Further allegations include the dissemination of misleading videos by AAP workers, allegedly under Atishi's direction, portraying supporters of her opponent, BJP's Ramesh Bidhuri, engaging in hooliganism. The petition asserts that these videos were fabricated to tarnish Bidhuri's reputation. Additionally, it is claimed that Atishi misused her official position as Chief Minister by employing government resources, such as official vehicles and staff, for her election campaign, thereby gaining an unfair advantage over other candidates.
The petitioners also contend that Atishi violated the 48-hour pre-election silence period and failed to disclose a pending criminal case in her election affidavit. They are seeking to have her election declared null and void.
During the court proceedings, representatives for the ECI and the returning officer objected to their inclusion as parties in the petition. However, Justice Singh directed them to preserve all records related to the Kalkaji constituency elections and stated that any objections could be included in their replies.
Atishi secured victory in the Kalkaji constituency by defeating BJP candidate Ramesh Bidhuri with a margin of 3,521 votes.
The court's decision to issue notices to Atishi and the other respondents marks the commencement of legal proceedings that could have significant implications for her political career and the AAP's standing in Delhi. The allegations, if proven, may lead to her election being overturned and could necessitate a by-election in the Kalkaji constituency.
The case also brings into focus the broader issue of electoral integrity and the mechanisms in place to address alleged malpractices. The Representation of the People Act, 1951, outlines various corrupt practices and provides for the disqualification of candidates found guilty of such offenses. The outcome of this case may set a precedent for how similar allegations are handled in the future.
As the legal process unfolds, it will be crucial for all parties involved to adhere to the principles of justice and fairness. The preservation of electoral integrity is fundamental to the democratic process, and any deviations must be addressed with the utmost seriousness.
Atishi, known for her work in education reform and as a prominent figure within the AAP, now faces a legal battle that could impact her political trajectory. The party, which has positioned itself as a crusader against corruption, may also find its image under scrutiny as these proceedings continue.
The Delhi High Court's involvement underscores the judiciary's role in upholding democratic principles and ensuring that electoral processes remain free and fair. The forthcoming hearings will be closely watched by political analysts, party supporters, and the electorate, all keen to see how the allegations are addressed and what implications they may have for future elections in the region.
The case also highlights the importance of transparency and accountability in political campaigns. Allegations of bribery and misuse of official positions strike at the heart of democratic values, and their adjudication will serve as a litmus test for the robustness of India's electoral oversight mechanisms.
As the July 30 hearing approaches, all eyes will be on the responses filed by Atishi, the ECI, Delhi Police, and the returning officer. The legal arguments presented and the evidence brought forth will be critical in determining the course of this case and its eventual outcome.