Can't Encroach Upon ECI Jurisdiction To Determine A Person's Eligibility For Inclusion In Voter List: Delhi Court In Sonia Gandhi Case

A Delhi Court on Thursday said that it cannot encroach upon the jurisdiction of the Election Commission of India by entertaining plea seeking FIR against Congress leader Sonia Gandhi for purportedly getting her name added in the electoral rolls of 1980, three years before getting Indian citizenship.

Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Vaibhav Chaurasiya of Rouse Avenue Courts dismissed in limine the complaint filed by Vikas Tripathi seeking criminal action against Gandhi, alleging that the Congress leader got her name in the voter list by using forged documents.

“…it becomes manifest that the present complaint has been fashioned with the object of clothing this Court with jurisdiction through allegations which are legally untenable, deficient in substance, and beyond the scope of this forum's authority. Such a stratagem constitutes nothing but an abuse of the process of law, which this Court cannot countenance,” the judge said.

Rejecting the plea, the Court observed that an endeavour was made by Tripathi to invoke the provisions relating to the offences of cheating and forgery under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in order to provide a colour of jurisdiction before the Court.

It said that mere bald assertions, unaccompanied by the essential particulars required to attract the statutory elements of cheating or forgery, cannot substitute a legally sustainable accusation as Tripathi was merely relying only upon extract of electoral roll which was a photocopy of the alleged extract of uncertified electoral roll of 1980.

“Such a course, in substance, amounts to a misuse of the process of law by projecting a civil or ordinary dispute in the garb of criminality, solely to create a jurisdiction where none exists,” it added.

Further, the judge said that the Court was not empowered to adjudicate upon questions relating to citizenship which, by express constitutional and statutory mandate, fall within the exclusive domain of the Central Government in view of Article 11 of Constitution of India, 1950 and Citizenship Act, 1955.

“Likewise, the authority to determine the eligibility of a person to be included in or excluded from the electoral roll and electoral offences thereof with predicate offence qua IPC/BNS is vested solely in the Election Commission of India under the Representation of the People Act, 1950, Representation of People Act, 1951 and the allied enactments. Any attempt by this Court to embark upon such an inquiry would result in an unwarranted transgression into fields expressly entrusted to the competent constitutional authorities and would be violation of Article 329 of Constitution of India, 1950,” the Court said.

It added that when the Constitution of India circumscribes the domain or arena of democratic function exclusively with Election Commission of India and Central Government, Tripathi cannot resort to private complaint under BNS to encroach upon their exclusive territory, as citizenship is the exclusive relationship between sovereign state and the subject.

“Whatever cannot be done directly, cannot be done indirectly. Mere addition of predicate offences under BNS 2023, with the mask of cognizability, will not justify for any interference in the Constitutional Functionaries by this Court,” the judge concluded.

It was Tripathi's case that Gandhi's name was included in the electoral rolls of the New Delhi constituency in 1980, whereas she got Indian citizenship in 1983.

It was his case that Gandhi's name was deleted from the electoral rolls in 1982 and re-entered in 1983. He alleged that the Congress leader used forged documents to get her name included in the electoral rolls, counsel demanded an FIR to be registered against her.

Click here to read order