In a fresh new controversy concerning the BJP, a complaint petition filed by civil activist Shehzad Poonawalla with the Election Commission of India states that BJP MPs Ramesh Bhiduri and Ajay Nishad had provided lied about their educational qualifications before the returning officers before elections.
Check the screenshots of the complaint which states the difference in information given by the BJP leaders on different occasions
The complainant came to know about the discrepancies in the affidavit when he read the affidavits filed by the two accused MPs and compared it with other affidavits filed by them earlier.
Speaking to Janta Ka Reporter, the complainant Shehzad Poonawalla said, “It is evident from the contents of the affidavits filed by them that at best, only one of the depositions by them on oath in respect of their educational qualifications is correct.”
The complaint further states that if the information provided by these ministers are indeed false, then Ramesh Bidhuri and Ajay Nishad have committed the following offences:
1) An offence U/s. 125 A of the RP Act, 1951, as they have submitted aforesaid false information, which they knew and had reason to believe to be false and/or have concealed relevant information.
2) An offence U/s. 171G IPC, as they have given a Statement of Fact, which they knew and believed it to be false and in any case did not believe it to be true in relation to their education qualification, which has direct bearing on personal character and conduct as candidates and they did it with an intent to affect the result of the Elections.
3) An offence U/s 177 IPC, since despite their knowledge and reason to believe it to be false, they have furnished false information regarding education qualification, though under the law they were legally bound to furnish the correct information.
4) An offence U/s 181 IPC, as they have made false statement before a Notary and Returning Officer- public officers, knowing that the statement is false and knew it and believed it to be false and in any case not to be true.
5) By giving false information about their education qualification, which they very well knew to be false, they have caused injury to the mind of not only the voters of their Constituency, but also voters of the country, as such said conduct of amounts to the commission of forgery and other offences.
6) That the preparation of documents in the form of affidavit by issuing declaration and subsequently presenting it before public notary constitutes penal offence under section 199 of the IPC apart from the offences punishable under the Representation of People Act.
7) That apart from offence under section 199 of the IPC the accused have also committed offence under sections 463 and 464 of the IPC and as such are liable to be punished for the same as per the provisions of law.
The complainant has urged the EC to write to Delhi University in case of Ramesh Bidhuri and Bihar University in case of Ajay Nishad to clarify if indeed Bidhuri and Nishad had completed graduation from the universities mentioned in their affidavits respectively, and if not further legal action must be initiated against them as per the law.
This fresh controversy comes at a time, when Union HRD Minister Smriti Irani is already embroiled in an “alleged” fake information regarding her educational qualifications filed in the affidavits prior to the 2014 General elections.
The Congress has already stepped up its attack on the BJP demanding the resignation of Union HRD Minister Smriti Irani for her alleged “fake degrees’.
Congress leader Ajay Maken earlier said, “Smriti Irani ji has given different info regarding her educational qualification in election affidavits, this is serious discrepancy.”
Speaking about the issue, Maken further said, “Court has found the matter cognizable, trial is going to start soon, the matter will be investigated.”
Questioning the entire episode, Maken added, “Is it not conflict of interest that she remains Education Minister of country while the matter will be under Court’s jurisdiction?
Delhi’s Patiala House Court has decided to hear petition challenging Smriti Irani’s education qualification. The court has set 28 August as the day of hearing.
Speaking to the media, Smriti Irani’s counsel said, “Yes Court has found plea maintainable, but only to the extent that complainant must show proof on day of hearing.”