Hearing on plea challenging Rakesh Singh’s election on 31st

Source: The Hitavada      Date: 13 Aug 2017 13:21:38

Legal Correspondent,

A Single Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court comprising Justice C V Sirpurkar has listed the matter related to challenging the election of Rakesh Singh from Parliamentary Constituency Jabalpur, for respondent’s evidence on August 31, 2017. During the hearing, counsel for the petitioner submits that he does not wish to adduce any more evidence. He declares the evidence of the petitioner closed. On the other hand, counsel for the respondent prays for time to adduce evidence. The single bench of MPHC comprising Justice C V Sirpurkar has listed the matter for respondent’s evidence on August 31.

In the previous hearing the single bench had granted time to the petitioner Abhay Singh for last opportunity to adduce further evidence in the matter. Petitioner witness Ajit Tiwari is present before the court and he is discharged after examination. The division bench has heard the election petition filed by Abhay Singh against Rakesh Singh. The petitioner challenging in the petition that petitioner has called in question the election of the respondent from 13 Parliamentary Constituency Jabalpur alleging that the respondent has resorted to corrupt practice during the election.

Counsel for the petitioner had submitted that the petitioner has specifically pleaded the date, time and place where the respondent along with Sharad Jain, Cabinet Minister of government of Madhya Pradesh and Pratibha Singh, BJP MLA pressurized Additional S P Mahesh Chandra Jain to seek his assistance for furtherance of his election prospects. The petitioner has specifically pleaded that at the behest of the respondent, Anchal Sonkar, MLA, Jabalpur has manhandled a lady Inspector and influenced the voters by threatening the electors of injury so that they are not able to freely exercise their voting right.


Petition challenging transfer orders disposed of

Legal Correspondent,

The single bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court comprising of Justice Sujoy Paul has disposed of the petition with directions that petitioner shall submit his representation along with copy of this order before the respondent within seven working days, failing which the interim protection shall not be available to the petitioner.

In turn, the said respondent shall consider and decide representation of the petitioner expeditiously by speaking order. The outcome shall be communicated to the petitioner. Subject to aforesaid, till representation is decide, the impugned transfer order, to the extent it relates to the petitioner, shall remain stayed. Petition is disposed of without expressing any view on merits.

The single bench has heard the petition filed by Gopal Krishna Malviya. Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner, a class- IV employee has been transferred from Dhimerkheda (Katni) to Shahdol by order dated July, 10, 2017 whereas petitioner and his wife are hundred percent deaf and dumb. Considering the aforesaid, the bench deem it proper to dispose of this petition with aforementioned directions.