We Neeraj Saxena (Advocate) and Sanjeev Gupta (Engineer) both (residents of Ghaziabad) and members of Maulik Bharat are working on electoral reforms, good governance, transparency and accountability for the last 5 years.
On 23 March 2017, The Election Commission of India conceded to our prayer to verify the moveable and immoveable assets of all candidates who contested Goa, Manipur, Punjab, Uttarakhand and Uttar Pradesh legislative elections 2017, by Income Tax Department.
General Elections to all five states were declared by ECI on 04 Jan 2017 and model code of conduct was imposed. Perhaps the ECI skipped its duty under Article 324 of Indian Constitution to get the contents of affidavits verified filed by candidates during general elections.
To remind the ECI of its duties under Article 324, we submitted a letter/memorandum at their secretariat on 17 January 2017 with a specific prayer “That affidavit in Form 26 (Rule 4A) (Conduct of Elections Rules-1961, filed by all contesting candidates along with nominations must be verified by Election Commission for the truthfulness of their contents”.
(Annex. 1 copy of Letter dated 17/01/2017).
(Annex. 1 copy of Letter dated 17/01/2017).
Getting no response from ECI on our prayer we filed an online RTI application No. ECOMM/R/2017/50236 on 10 Feb 2017 to know the action initiated if any by ECI on our prayer. (Annex. 2, copy of online RTI dated 10 Feb 2017).
As ECI was again not responsive and considering the seriousness of the matter we went to ECI secretariat at Ashoka Road, New Delhi and re-submitted (hard copy) of RTI application on 10 March 2017.
(Annex. 3, copy of RTI application acknowledged on 10/3/2017).
(Annex. 3, copy of RTI application acknowledged on 10/3/2017).
Public Information Officer of Election Commission while replying to the (point 9) of RTI application vide letter No. 4/RTI/PB/2017/NS-I/183 dated 30 March 2017 (Annex. 4) also sent us (copies) of two more letters bearing No 76/ECI/LET/EEM/EL.Ex/IED/EEPS/
Category-A
Specific cases forwarded by ECI.
Category-B
Cases witnessing phenomenal growth when the current affidavit is compared to that filed during the previous elections, if any.
Category-C
Cases of winning Candidates and the veracity of the affidavits compared to the returns of income, if any, filed by them.
Category-D
Instances where there was no PAN but movable/immovable asset disclosed were in excess of Rs. 5 Crore.
Category-E
Cases where addition of new immovable assets above a threshold say Rs. 2 crore vis-à-vis last affidavit, if any, was witnessed and to report additional concealment detected/estimated by Income Tax Department within 6 months i.e. September 2017.
Copies of the aforesaid letters dated 23/3/2017 have also been sent to The Chairman CBDT, North Block, New Delhi, The Member (Investigation), CBDT, North Block, New Delhi for their information and also to The Chief Electoral Officers of Goa, Manipur, Punjab, Uttarakhand and Uttar Pradesh for necessary action with request to kindly make available the url and soft copy of affidavit lodged by the contesting candidates to the concerned DGIT(Inv.) under information to the Election Commission.
[Annex 5A Copy of Letter dated 23/3/2017 to Director (Inv. V) CBDT]
[Annex 5B Copy of Letter dated 23/3/2017 to all DGITs]
We, Neeraj Saxena Advocate, Sanjeev Gupta Engineer, Anuj Agarwal, Vikram Choudhary and Ghanshyam Lal Sharma, the team ‘Maulik Bharat’ have persistently endeavouring for verification of contents of candidates’ affidavits by The Election Commission of India.
Brief back ground :
In reply to our contention in W.P. (C) 443/2014 (Maulik Bharat Trust-through founder trustee Anuj Agarwal and Neeraj Saxena versus Election Commission of India and others) for formulation of stringent procedure/mechanism for verification and scrutiny of Nomination Papers and Affidavits of all contesting candidates in election to any public office in India the counsel for the respondent No. 1 Election Commission of India appearing on advance notice before Hon’ble Delhi High Court invited attention to Section 36 of the Representation of People Act, 1951 providing for scrutiny of Nomination papers and to Section 125A providing penalty for filing false affidavit etc. contended that remedies have been provided under the said Act for situations for which guidelines are sought to be framed. It is further stated that it is not feasible for the Election Commission to verify contents of Nomination Forms and Affidavits in the short time available.
The question of verification of the contents of affidavits was also raised by Mr. Anuj Aggarwal (Maulik Bharat Founder Trustee) on 05 March 2014 before the then Chief Election Commissioner Sh. V. S. Sampath at Vigyan Bhawan, New Delhi during a Press Conference convened for declaring schedule for Parliamentary Elections-2014. video can be seen at url : https://www.youtube.com/edit?o
Accused Arvind Kejriwal (Chief Minister of Delhi) was released on bail on 24/12/2016 by Patiala House Court Metropolitan Magistrate for offences under section 31 RP Act 1950, (Making false Declarations), section 125A RP Act 1951 (Penalty for filing false Affidavit etc.) and 177 IPC (Furnishing false information) in criminal complaint case No. 20786/2016 titled Neeraj Saxena and Anuj Agarwal versus Arvind Kejriwal.
With warm regards.
Neeraj Saxena (Advocate),