Senior Congress leader Sonia Gandhi has received a significant reprieve from the Rouse Avenue Court in Delhi. The court has granted her additional time to respond to a petition seeking directions to register an FIR regarding allegations of fraud in the voter list.
New Delhi: The Rouse Avenue Court in Delhi on Tuesday granted time to senior Congress leader Sonia Gandhi to file a response to the petition seeking directions to register an FIR concerning allegations that her name was fraudulently included in the voter list. This petition challenges the Magistrate's order refusing to investigate the allegations. According to the petitioner, Sonia Gandhi's name was registered in the voter list even before she acquired Indian citizenship, specifically before 1983.
What is the entire matter?
The dispute revolves around the allegation that Sonia Gandhi's name was registered in the voter list of the New Delhi parliamentary constituency in 1980, while she obtained Indian citizenship in 1983. The petitioner claims that registering a name in the voter list before obtaining citizenship falls under the ambit of fraud and forgery and should be criminally investigated.
The request to register an FIR in this matter was previously dismissed by the Magistrate court. A revision petition challenging that order has been filed, which is now being heard in the Rouse Avenue Court.
What decision did the court take?
Special Judge Vishal Gogne of the Rouse Avenue Court, accepting the request of the lawyer appearing for Sonia Gandhi, granted her time to file a response. The court has also fixed the next hearing of the case for February 7th. Previously, on December 9th, the court issued notices to Sonia Gandhi and the Delhi Police on this petition, so that both parties could present their arguments.
This revision petition has been filed by Advocate Vikas Tripathi, who is the Vice President of the Central Delhi Court Bar Association. Senior Advocate Pawan Narang presented arguments in court on behalf of the petitioner. He argued that if the allegations are found to be true, the matter constitutes a serious criminal offense and an investigation is necessary.
What did the Magistrate court say earlier?
Earlier, on September 11th, the Magistrate court dismissed the request to register an FIR, stating that the matter was beyond its jurisdiction. The court clarified that investigations related to voter lists and citizenship fall under the jurisdiction of constitutional authorities, such as the central government and the Election Commission.
The Magistrate court also stated that initiating such an investigation would violate Article 329 of the Indian Constitution, which defines the limits of judicial intervention in electoral matters.
