 |
| Bharatpur counting row: SC directs EC to present torn ballot papers within a week |
The Supreme Court on Tuesday directed the Election Commission (EC) to come up with the torn ballot papers of Bharatpur Metropolitan City-19, Chitwan before the court within a week.
A division bench of acting Chief Justice Gopal Parajuli and justice Hari Krishna Karki issued an order directing the concerned authorities to furnish the shredded ballot papers, EC’s decision to conduct re-polling and the file of court case against those involved in tearing up the ballot papers within a week.
The court was hearing a writ petition filed by Gunjaman BK, a ward member candidate for Bharatpur-19, and Tulsiram Pandey, an advocate, challenging the election body's decision.
The Election Commission (EC) had, on June 3, had decided to conduct re-polling in Ward 19 of Bharatpur Metropolitan City, saying a report submitted by Chitwan chief election officer showed that the counting centre was illegitimately taken under control.
Ninety ballot papers were allegedly torn by CPN (Maoist Centre) representatives when the counting of votes at Bharatpur Metropolitan City Ward-19 was underway on the night of May 28.
Some Maoist Centre representatives had allegedly torn ballot papers at around 11:45pm on May 28 when CPN-UML’s Mayoral candidate Devi Gywali was ahead of Maoist Centre’s Renu Dahal in the mayoral race of Bharatpur. Renu is daughter of Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal.
Responding to the writ earlier on June 5, the SC had stayed the EC decision to conduct re-election in Ward 19 of Bharatpur Metropolitan City and asked the authorities concerned to maintain status quo.
BK and Pandey had moved the apex court on June 4 demanding the court annul its decision to conduct re-election in Ward 19 of Bharatpur and order to resume vote counting.
The petitioners have argued that the poll body’s decision to conclude that the vote counting centre was captured and call for re-election was completely erroneous.
The hearing on Bharatpur vote count fiasco subjudice at the Supreme Court could not be held earlier on two occasions citing time constraints.
source: kathmandu post
