Is FIR against Modi for violation of model poll code of conduct justified? -Governance Now

Is FIR against Modi for violation of model poll code of conduct justified?

GN Bureau | May 1, 2014

Narendra Modi, Gujarat chief minister and the BJP’s prime ministerial candidate, landed in a soup moments after casting his vote in on April 30. He held a miniature metal lotus – the party’s symbol – to take a ‘selfie’ with his cellphone and then addressed the waiting media, holding the lotus in full display of the television cameras. And all this within 100 metres of the polling station – an act deemed illegal under section 130 of the Representation of the People Act-1951 (RP Act).

As the Congress, and several other opposition parties, cried foul, calling it a clear case of violation of the election model code of conduct (MCC), the election commission (EC) sent a notice within hours, ordering the state police to register an FIR against the chief minister.

And then all hell broke loose.

The BJP claims it is a case of witch-hunting, with Modi himself hinting that his action did not merit filing an FIR. "I will never forget April 30. One can understand if someone points (threatens with) a knife, a pistol or a gun (and FIR is registered). But do you know why FIR was registered against me? Because I showed a lotus to the people," he said at a campaign rally in Tirupati, according to PTI.

The EC, though, felt it was a clear case of “violation of provisions of Section 126 of RP Act 1951 by Sh. Narendra Modi & Others”. Besides displaying the metal lotus, the commission also observed that Modi addressing the media was also violation of law. Modi’s address, the EC letter to Gujarat chief secretary and the state director general of police stated, “was in the nature of political speech intended and calculated to influence and affect the result of elections in the constituencies going to polls today...”

“We have registered an FIR against Chief Minister Narendra Modi as directed by the EC under Section 126 (1) (a) and 126 (1) (b) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, and Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code,” DCP (Crime) Himanshu Shukla was quoted in the Indian Express.

While the BJP considers it an overreach for a minor incident that should have been ignored, many others say the EC was left with no option but to have Modi booked. A man of Modi’s stature should be extra careful of being in the right side of law, they argue.

So is the FIR justified?

Comments

Other News

India lost Rs 52,000 crore to cyber fraud in five years: DoT

India has lost more than Rs 52,000 crore to cyber fraud over the last five years, officials have revealed. Out of approximately 60 lakh cyber fraud complaints received, more than 3,000 cases have been resolved and six cyber fraud setups have been busted. On the occ

India must not wait for its own Ella

In many Indian cities, children learn to wear masks before they are old enough to understand why. That reality should alarm us far more than it does. In 2020, nine-year-old Ella Adoo Kissi Debrah became the first person in the world to have air pollution officially recognized a

An ode to the cradle of humankind

The Alphabets of Africa: Poems By Abhay K. Vintage Classics, 280 pages, ₹499.00 Abhay K

Ahmedabad district railway network to be expanded

The Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs, chaired by prime minister Narendra Modi, on Wednesday approved the Ahmedabad (Sarkhej) – Dholera Semi High-Speed Double Line project of Ministry of Railways with total cost of Rs. 20,667 crore (approx.). It will be Indian Railways 1st semi high-speed project

Indian Ocean more contested than ever: Western Naval Command Chief

The Indian Ocean is becoming increasingly contested and strategically significant as the Indo-Pacific emerges as the defining geopolitical theatre of the 21st century, Vice Admiral Krishna Swaminathan, Flag Officer Commanding-in-Chief of the Western Naval Command, has said. Spe

Why the judiciary needs much more than four more judges

India has a particular form of governance theatre: the bold declaration that appears to be action but is actually a way of avoiding action. The Union Cabinet on May 5 approved a Bill to increase the sanctioned strength of the Supreme Court from 34 to 38. The decision has been touted as a step toward judici