Chandigarh mayor polls: today’s video recording and examination of vote papers by the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court will review the ballots that Chandigarh’s mayoral election returner, Returning Officer Anil Masih, declared illegal. The returning officer acknowledged to marking certain vote papers in front of a three-judge panel led by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud on Monday. The Supreme Court will also see the video footage of the counting day, which has been clouded in controversy.

On January 30, the contentious Chandigarh mayoral elections were easily won by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). With the backing of the Congress party, Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) nominee Kuldeep Kumar was predicted to win the mayoral seat; however, Manoj Sonkar of the BJP prevailed, receiving 16 votes to his opponent’s 12. There were eight invalid votes.

The BJP went on to win the deputy mayor and senior deputy mayor elections, which the AAP and Congress boycotted.

Kumar filed a Supreme Court appeal to the election results, claiming that there had been vote manipulation, and he also provided a video of the voting process. Following the viewing of the video, the court declared that the returning officer seemed to be tampering with the ballots, and they requested that he appear on February 19.

Sonkar resigned the day before the hearing because three AAP council members and the mayor of Chandigarh joined the BJP.

What took place in the Supreme Court
The votes cast in the contentious Chandigarh mayoral elections last month were ordered to be brought before the Supreme Court on Tuesday.

“This is a really important issue. Masih was informed by the bench, which also included justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, that “you will be prosecuted in case of any falsehood.”

“Why were you looking into the camera and putting the ‘X’ mark on the ballot papers?” the judge inquired.

Masih justified himself by claiming that all he was doing was marking out votes that had been vandalized.

“There were so many cameras that I was just looking at those,” said the returning officer.

The judge said, “You can sign the ballot papers, but why were you putting ‘X’ on those ballot papers?”

The CJI said, “It means, you marked it,” and went on to say that Masih needed to face charges, which was unacceptable in an elective democracy.

In addition, CJI Chandrachud said that rather than calling for new elections, the court may think about announcing the results based on votes previously cast.

We peruse newspapers as well. The court expressed serious concerns about the “horse-trading” that was occurring, citing the AAP council members’ departure before to the hearing.