SC Orders Ajit Pawar NCP To Issue Disclaimer On Clock Symbol Case Within 36 Hours

The Supreme Court on Wednesday has ordered the Ajit Pawar-led faction in Maharashtra to publish a disclaimer in newspapers, including Marathi publications, stating that the allocation of the “clock” symbol is currently under judicial review.

The court mandated that this disclaimer be published within 36 hours of the ruling.

A bench comprising Justices Surya Kant, Dipankar Datta, and Ujjal Bhuyan addressed the ongoing dispute between the factions led by Sharad Pawar and Ajit Pawar regarding the use of the “clock” symbol. The court urged both groups to redirect their energies toward engaging with voters instead of prolonging legal battles. “Don’t waste your energy in courts. You both should go and be with the voters to woo them,” the bench advised.

During the proceedings, senior advocate Balbir Singh, representing the Ajit Pawar faction, argued that candidates had already filed their nominations and that the withdrawal period had passed. He accused the Sharad Pawar faction of attempting to disrupt the electoral process.

In contrast, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing the Sharad Pawar faction, asserted that the “clock” symbol had been associated with Sharad Pawar for over 30 years and accused the opposing faction of attempting to misuse it.

Singhvi requested that the Ajit Pawar-led group be directed to seek a new symbol.

The court’s intervention comes amid ongoing tensions between the two factions, highlighting the complexities of political symbolism and representation in Maharashtra’s electoral landscape. By urging both sides to focus on the electorate, the Supreme Court aims to streamline the electoral process and mitigate distractions caused by legal disputes.

This ruling not only emphasizes the importance of clarity regarding electoral symbols but also reflects the court’s commitment to ensuring a fair electoral process in Maharashtra.

As the political landscape evolves, both factions will need to navigate this challenge carefully while addressing the concerns of their respective voter bases.

Read More: Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, States High Court, International