The High Court of Delhi on Wednesday issued notice on a petition, which questioned the educational qualification of Union Minister Smriti Irani on the grounds that she furnished ‘false’ and ‘misleading’ information in three affidavits filed before the Election Commission of India in 2004, 2011 and 2014.
The single-judge Bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, while noting that Assistant Public Prosecutor (APP) Manoj Pant had accepted the notice on behalf of the Respondent/State, listed the petition for further hearing on arguments on maintainability on October 19.
The APP today questioned the maintainability of the petition on the grounds that petitioner Ahmer Khan did not approach the Sessions Court and directly moved the High Court by filing a revision petition.
However, the counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the plea was maintainable as the Sessions Court and the High Court have concurrent jurisdiction.
The petitioner had challenged a trial court order, which rejected his complaint and also refused to summon Irani in the matter.
The petition alleged that Irani gave false information about her educational qualification, while filing her nominations for elections to the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha.
Khan further stated in the complaint that for contesting elections to the Lok Sabha in 2004 from Chandni Chowk, Irani stated in her affidavit that she had completed her BA in 1996 from the Delhi University (School of Correspondence).
However, Irani, while filling her nomination for the Rajya Sabha polls from Gujarat in 2011, filed another affidavit, stating that her highest educational qualification was B. Com Part 1 School of Correspondence-University of Delhi in 1994.
He further mentioned another affidavit filed by the Union Minister in 2014 for contesting elections to the Lok Sabha from Amethi, wherein she stated that she did her Bachelor of Commerce Part-1 from school of open learning (Correspondence) University of Delhi in 1994.
Khan submitted that there was a clear discrepancy in the three affidavits and that Irani deliberately furnished false information.
He said that the Metropolitan Magistrate vide an impugned order passed on October 18, 2016, rejected his complaint and declined to summon Irani on completely ‘unfounded’, ‘speculative’ and ‘frivolous’ grounds.
As per the petitioner, the Metropolitan Magistrate had exceeded his jurisdiction in dismissing the complaint by recording a ‘positive’ finding that no prima facie case was made against Irani.
He submitted that the Magistrate had literally conferred a degree to the accused respondent by holding that it was clear from CW4/B that she had passed subsidiary papers chosen vide CW4/A and hence, no false information was given qua her educational qualification, which was completely illegal, without authority and untenable.
Khan said the Magistrate further observed that there was no rule to stop a person from claiming to have passed the examination of 1st year of Bachelor even if she has not completed the full course.
Khan was represented by Advocates Rajesh Inamdar, Sheena T. and Ayushi Mittal. APP Manoj Pant appeared for the State.
(Case title: Ahmer Khan vs State & Anr)