A Delhi Court Reserves Order On Alleged Forgery In Sonia Gandhi’s Voter List Entry on Wednesday reserved its order in a petition seeking a probe into allegations that Congress leader Sonia Gandhi was listed as a voter in the New Delhi constituency in 1980, several years before she obtained Indian citizenship.
The complaint, filed by Vikas Tripathi, raises questions over the legitimacy of her inclusion in the electoral rolls.
The hearing was conducted before Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Vaibhav Chaurasia, who after listening to arguments stated, “I am reserving the order.” The court will announce its decision after considering the submissions and legal implications.
Crux Of The Allegations
The petition argues that in January 1980, Sonia Gandhi’s name was added to the voter list despite her not being an Indian citizen at that time. Senior advocate Pavan Narang, representing the complainant, emphasized that citizenship is a prerequisite for registering as a voter.
He told the court, “The only issue involved here is that in January 1980 Sonia Gandhi’s name was added as a voter of New Delhi constituency when she was not an Indian citizen.” He further explained that proof of residency, likely verified through documents such as ration cards or passports, is essential for inclusion in electoral records.
The petition also draws attention to the fact that Sonia Gandhi’s name was removed from the rolls in 1982, alongside that of her late husband Sanjay Gandhi, who had died in a plane crash. Narang questioned the rationale behind the deletion, asking, “If she was a citizen, then why was her name deleted in 1982?”
According to the complaint, the deletion suggests that the Election Commission might have identified irregularities regarding her eligibility at that time. The petition states that her name was reinstated in 1983, after she formally acquired citizenship.
Case Insights
The plea has been filed under Section 175(4) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), which grants magistrates the authority to order investigations. The petitioner urges the court to direct police authorities to initiate an inquiry into the possibility of forgery and deceit that may have misled government institutions.
The complainant’s lawyer argued, “My limited request is to either direct the police to register an FIR under the appropriate sections. Whether they are made out or not is the domain of the police.”
Read More: Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, States High Court, International
