English हिन्दी
Connect with us

Latest Politics News

EC directs Delhi Police to file FIR against Gautam Gambhir for holding rally without permission

Published

on

Gautam Gambhir joins BJP

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]The Election Commission has asked the Delhi Police to register an FIR against Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Gautam Gambhir for violating the Model Code of Conduct after he reportedly held a public meeting without permission.

East Delhi Electoral Officer K Mahesh on Saturday asked Delhi Police to register an FIR against Gautam Gambhir for rallying without permission from the commission in Jungpura on April 26.

Gautam Gambhir is BJP’s candidate from the East Delhi constituency.

Earlier, Gambhir landed in a controversy after AAP leader Atishi filed a complaint against the former cricketer and BJP candidate Gautam Gambhir for allegedly enrolling as a voter in more than one constituency in violation of the Representation of the People Act (RPA).

Atishi also addressed a press conference to disclose the details of her complaint. She took to the Twitter too to state that Gambhir committed a “disqualifiable offence”.

She also urged voters not to vote for the BJP candidate, saying he would be “disqualified sooner or later for having two Voter ID cards!”[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_raw_html]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[/vc_raw_html][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]The AAP candidate submitted that as per Section 17 of The Representation of the People Act, 1950, no person can be enrolled as a voter in more than one constituency and doing so is a criminal offence punishable with imprisonment up to one year or a fine, or both.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1556362837741{border-top-width: 10px !important;border-right-width: 10px !important;border-bottom-width: 10px !important;border-left-width: 10px !important;padding-top: 10px !important;padding-right: 10px !important;padding-bottom: 10px !important;padding-left: 10px !important;background-color: #dbdbdb !important;border-radius: 10px !important;}”]Sections 17 and 31 of the said Act are reproduced below:

“17. No person to be registered in more than one constituency.— No person shall be entitled to be registered in the electoral roll for more than one constituency. […]

  1. Making false declarations.—If any person makes in connection with— (a) the preparation, revision or correction of an electoral roll, or (b) the inclusion or exclusion of any entry in or from an electoral roll, a statement or declaration in writing which is false and which he either knows or believes to be false or does not believe to be true, he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both.”

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Atishi claimed that despite the law, Gambhir continues to provide false information and declarations to authorities like the Election Commission of India, in order to remain enrolled as a voter in two constituencies.

‘Gambhir concealed the fact that he is registered in two constituencies’

She claimed that in his nomination filed at the district magistrate’s office in Shastri Nagar, on April 23, Gambhir concealed the fact that he is registered in the two constituencies “perhaps because he feared that the same would disqualify him from contesting elections”.

“By only submitting the electoral roll of only AC-39, Rajinder Nagar in PC-04, New DelGambhi, NCT of Delhi, the accused deliberately gave false information to the Returning Officer that he is enrolled from only a single constituency,” the affidavit stated.

Also Read: Lok Sabha Election 2019 will witness actor, boxer, singer, and cricketer contesting polls from Delhi

She also submitted a copy of Gambhir’s affidavit in which he has stated that he is a “resident of 6B/8, N.E.A., Old Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi 110070” and that his “name is enrolled in AC-39, Rajinder nagar in PC-04, New Delhi, NCT of Delhi, at serial No. 285 in Part No. 43.”

`Wilful, deliberate acts make Gambhir liable for criminal prosecution’

Atishi insisted that “these wilful and deliberate acts of the accused during the nomination and scrutiny process are a blatant violation of 5 Sections 33 and 33A of The Representation of the People Act, 1951, and he is liable for criminal prosecution under Section 125A of The Representation of the People Act, 1951.”

Her affidavit elaborated, “Section 33 of the said Act imposes requirements on candidates to file nomination papers and in cases where a candidate is contesting in a constituency other than where they are registered to vote, to also disclose proof of voter registration at the time of scrutiny by the Returning Officer. Further Section 33A of the said Act requires candidates to file accompanying affidavits inter alia verifying information provided in nomination papers.”

Also Read: Bollywood actor Sunny Deol joins BJP in presence of Nirmala Sitharaman and Piyush Goyal

As for Section 125A of The RPI ACT, it stated that this section “makes it a criminal offence to conceal information or provide false information in the Nomination Paper and Affidavit filed in terms of Sections 33 and 33A of the same Act.”

The court will be hearing the plea against Gautam Gambhir on May 1.

(With Inputs from ‘The Wire’)[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

India News

Renaming MGNREGA removes core spirit of rural employment law, says Shashi Tharoor

Published

on

Shashi Tharoor

Congress MP Shashi Tharoor has strongly criticised the renaming of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), saying the move strips the rural employment programme of its core essence. His remarks came after Parliament cleared the Viksit Bharat Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) Bill, also referred to as the VB-G RAM G Bill.

Speaking to media, Tharoor said the decision to remove Mahatma Gandhi’s name from the scheme “takes out the heart” of the rural employment programme that has been in place for years. He noted that the identity and philosophy associated with Mahatma Gandhi were central to the original law.

Tharoor also objected to the way the new name was framed, arguing that it unnecessarily combined multiple languages. He pointed out that the Constitution envisages the use of one language in legislation, while the Bill’s title mixes English and Hindi terms such as “Guarantee”, “Rozgar” and “Ajeevika”, along with the conjunction “and”.

‘Disrespect to both names’

The Congress leader said that inserting the word “Ram” while dropping Mahatma Gandhi’s name amounted to disrespecting both. Referring to Mahatma Gandhi’s ideas, Tharoor said that for Gandhi, the concepts of Gram Swaraj and Ram Rajya were inseparable, and removing his name from a rural employment law went against that vision.

He added that the name of Lord Ram could be used in many contexts, but questioned the rationale behind excluding Mahatma Gandhi from a programme closely linked to his philosophy of village self-rule.

Protests over passage of the Bill

The VB-G RAM G Bill was passed by the Lok Sabha on December 18 and cleared by the Rajya Sabha in the early hours of December 19 amid protests from Opposition members. Several MPs opposed the manner in which the legislation was pushed through, with scenes of sloganeering and tearing of papers in the House.

Outside Parliament, members of the Trinamool Congress staged a sit-in protest near Samvidhan Sadan against the passage of the Bill. Congress also announced nationwide protests earlier this week, accusing the government of weakening rights-based welfare schemes.

Despite opposition criticism, the government has maintained that the new law will strengthen rural employment and livelihood security. The Bill raises the guaranteed employment from 100 days to 125 days per rural household and outlines a 60:40 cost-sharing formula between the Centre and states, with a higher central share for northeastern, Himalayan states and certain Union Territories.

Continue Reading

India News

Rahul Gandhi attacks G RAM G bill, says move against villages and states

Rahul Gandhi has criticised the G RAM G bill cleared by Parliament, alleging it dilutes the rights-based structure of MGNREGA and centralises control over rural employment.

Published

on

Rahul Gandhi

Leader of the Opposition Rahul Gandhi has launched a sharp attack on the Modi government after Parliament cleared the Viksit Bharat Guarantee for Employment and Livelihood Mission (Rural) Bill, commonly referred to as the ‘G RAM G’ bill. He described the proposed law as “anti-state” and “anti-village”, arguing that it weakens the core spirit of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA).

The new legislation, which is positioned as an updated version of MGNREGA, was passed amid protests by opposition parties and is expected to replace the existing scheme once it receives presidential assent.

‘Bulldozed without scrutiny’, says Rahul Gandhi

Rahul Gandhi criticised the manner in which the bill was cleared, saying it was pushed through Parliament without adequate debate or examination. He pointed out that the opposition’s demand to refer the bill to a standing committee was rejected.

According to him, any law that fundamentally alters the rural employment framework and affects crores of workers should undergo detailed scrutiny, expert consultation and public hearings before approval.

Claim of dilution of rights-based guarantee

Targeting the central government, the Congress leader said the proposed law dismantles the rights-based and demand-driven nature of MGNREGA and replaces it with a rationed system controlled from Delhi. He argued that this shift undermines the autonomy of states and villages.

Rahul Gandhi alleged that the intent behind the move is to centralise power and weaken labour, particularly impacting rural communities such as Dalits, OBCs and Adivasis.

Defence of MGNREGA’s impact

Highlighting the role of MGNREGA, Gandhi said the scheme provided rural workers with bargaining power, reduced distress migration and improved wages and working conditions, while also contributing to rural infrastructure development.

He also recalled the role of MGNREGA during the Covid period, stating that it prevented crores of people from slipping into hunger and debt. According to him, any rationing of a jobs programme first affects women, landless workers and the poorest communities.

Opposition to name change and provisions

The Congress has also objected to the renaming of the scheme, accusing the government of attempting to erase the legacy associated with Mahatma Gandhi. Opposition MPs staged a dharna within the Parliament complex, questioning provisions of the bill that they claim dilute the “soul and spirit” of the original law enacted in 2005.

Under MGNREGA, the government guaranteed 100 days of work in rural areas along with an unemployment allowance if work was not provided. The ‘G RAM G’ bill proposes to raise the guaranteed workdays to 125, while retaining other provisions. However, critics have flagged concerns over employment being linked to pre-approved plans.

The bill was cleared after a midnight voice vote in the Rajya Sabha, following its passage in the Lok Sabha amid protests and walkouts. It will become law once approved by the President.

Continue Reading

India News

AAP dominates Punjab zila parishad polls, leads in most panchayat samiti zones

AAP has won 201 out of 317 declared zila parishad zones in Punjab so far and is leading in a majority of panchayat samiti seats, with counting still underway.

Published

on

Punjab Zila Parishad Polls

The ruling Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) has recorded a strong performance in the Punjab zila parishad elections and is leading in the majority of panchayat samiti zones, as per results declared so far on Thursday. The counting process is still underway and complete results are awaited, officials said.

Polling for the rural local bodies was held on December 14 to elect representatives across 347 zones of 22 zila parishads and 2,838 zones of 153 panchayat samitis in the state.

AAP secures clear edge in zila parishads

According to the available results, outcomes have been declared for 317 zila parishad zones so far. Of these, the AAP has won 201 zones, placing it well ahead of other parties.

The Congress emerged second with victories in 60 zones, followed by the Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) with 39 zones. The BJP won four zones, the BSP secured three, while independents claimed 10 zones.

District-wise data shows that the AAP won 22 zones in Hoshiarpur, 19 each in Amritsar and Patiala, 17 each in Tarn Taran and Gurdaspur, and 15 zones in Sangrur. The Congress registered its best performances in Gurdaspur and Ludhiana with eight zones each, followed by Jalandhar with seven zones. The SAD performed strongly in Bathinda with 13 zones, while the BJP managed to win four zones in Pathankot.

AAP leads in panchayat samiti results

In the panchayat samiti elections, trends declared so far indicate that the AAP is leading in a majority of zones. However, officials clarified that counting is ongoing and the final picture will be clear only after all ballot papers are tallied.

Kejriwal, Mann reject opposition allegations

Reacting to the trends, AAP supremo Arvind Kejriwal said the party’s performance reflected strong rural support for the Bhagwant Mann government’s work. Addressing the media in Mohali along with Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann, Kejriwal dismissed allegations of irregularities raised by opposition parties.

He said the elections were conducted in a fair and free manner and claimed that the results so far showed a clear wave in favour of the AAP in rural Punjab. Kejriwal stated that nearly 70 per cent of the zila parishad and panchayat samiti seats had gone in favour of the party.

Congress, SAD question poll conduct

The Congress and the Shiromani Akali Dal, however, accused the ruling party of misusing official machinery. Punjab Congress chief Amrinder Singh Raja Warring alleged that the AAP had “stolen” the rural mandate and claimed that the results did not reflect genuine public support.

Opposition parties had earlier also accused the AAP government of high-handedness during the polling process, allegations that the ruling party has strongly denied.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com