Plea spree against poll outcomes soon

If there’s speculation of strange if not shocking performance by several candidates, there’s as much a strong case for far more petitions challenging poll results on a variety of grounds untested in a court of law so far.

And there are questions that will give president Pratibha Devisingh Patil sleepless nights very soon. Whether she should invite the leader of the largest single party to form the government or the leader of a group of parties? Does she have to ensure that there’s no horse-trading or to abide by the principle that the strength of a government could be tested only on the floor of the House and not at the Rashtrapati Bhavan?

Legal pundits who have divergent opinions on a contentious issue with lego-political ramifications would have to rephrase their earlier opinions on the same issue. In other words, very soon our nation would have the responsibility of understanding the intent of the Constitution-makers and the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in a plethora of rulings on powers of the president or governors to dismantle or create governments. But that will take place after our millionaire and many billionaire candidates dust off their election garb and return to their daily lifestyle.

Even before the poll dust settles own, a large number of candidates likely to be aggrieved by defeat, would not mind challenging the poll outcome and seek unseating of the elected candidate. After all, the campaign has seen huge fodder for raising a dispute. Mind you, even a voter can file a plea challenging election of a candidate.

What are the likely grounds that could be engineered in the 2009 poll petitions? Electoral corrupt practice is a wide term and is used to seek invalidating of the poll result.

Even though Sanjay Dutt isn’t a candidate, his speeches referring to alleged torture in jail “for having a Muslim mother” could be a cause for concern for the candidate for whom he was seeking votes. If proved guilty of securing votes by defying the principle of secularism, the candidate concerned could be unseated and Dutt disqualified from voting for six years.

This election has exposed many Dutts. The outcome of poll petitions would depend on interpretation of the Supreme Court’s judgment that defined ‘Hindutva’ and ordered disqualification of Shiv Sena chief Bal Thackeray from casting his vote or contesting any election for calling Muslims names at a poll rally.