Supreme Court's ultimatum to BJP leader in poll hearing

The top court expressed anguish that the high court had not taken its earlier order of August 2023 to expeditiously decide the election petition in the right perspective. It sought Chaubey's response for holding day-to-day hearings to ensure the proceedings end by June 30.

Unlock exclusive access to the latest news on India's general elections, only on the HT App. Download Now! Download Now!

Warning of serious action, the court issued a show-cause notice to Chaubey, threatening to issue non-bailable warrants if he fails to remain present in the high court. The court also explored the possibility of relieving him from his posts of president of the All India Football Federation (AIFF) and joint secretary of the Indian Olympic Association (IOA). The court was informed that Chaubey had cited his preoccupations with the sports bodies as reasons for getting the election petition adjourned.

Read more: Lok Sabha polls phase 2: Nearly 61% voter turnout till 7pm, Tripura tops list

A bench of justices Surya Kant and PS Narasimha said, "We are satisfied that respondent (Kalyan Chaubey) is adopting delaying tactics... Let show-cause notice be issued as to why he should not be directed to be released from the posts of President, AIFF, and chief executive officer and joint secretary, IOA. It will allow respondent to fully concentrate on election petition proceedings."

The notice further required Chaubey to explain why he should not be asked to give an undertaking of having no objection if the matter is heard on a daily basis and completed by June 30. "Further, if respondent does not appear, we shall explore to secure his presence by issuing a non-bailable warrant as we are convinced he is avoiding the proceeding deliberately and wilfully."

Chaubey had approached the high court soon after losing to Trinamool Congress (TMC) candidate Sadhan Pande in the Maniktala constituency during the 2021 West Bengal assembly polls. Following Pande's death in February 2022, three Maniktala residents filed a PIL in the Calcutta high court seeking bypolls. However, due to the pendency of the election petition, the state election commission could not hold the election. The three residents, led by Suvendu Dey, approached the top court in May last year through advocate Mithu Jain, asking the court to expedite the election petition proceedings.

Read more: Castes from Muslim communities 'intentionally' included in backward classes: BJP

Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for the residents, submitted that since the top court's order on August 18 last year directing the high court to expedite the hearing, the election petitioner has been undermining the court's orders. According to Section 86 (7) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, an election petition must be decided within six months. However, in this case, 32 months have already elapsed.

The bench said, "We are constrained to observe that the request made to the high court on August 18, 2023, has not been appreciated in the right perspective." The court kept open the possibility of transferring the petition to the Delhi high court.

Following the August 18 order, the high court took up the case 12 times, with only five days of effective hearing. On other occasions, Chaubey moved applications citing prior engagements due to the Asian Games, official engagements, and health reasons, preventing his statement from being recorded by the high court.

Under Section 151A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, no constituency can remain vacant or unrepresented, and a bye-election for filling such vacancy has to be held within six months. The petitioners moved an application seeking a direction to the Election Commission to hold by-elections for the Maniktala constituency.